[HN Gopher] How Intuitive Are Macs Really?
___________________________________________________________________
How Intuitive Are Macs Really?
Author : jermaustin1
Score : 152 points
Date : 2021-05-24 13:01 UTC (10 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (jeremyaboyd.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (jeremyaboyd.com)
| eptcyka wrote:
| I can't stress enough how bad apple devices are for the
| uninitiated. I got my mom an iPad for her birthday, as she needed
| something to read medical books with color and watch YouTube. It
| took her a week to get youtube working, and copying over PDFs is
| still done piecmeal - sending each file from her Windows PC one
| by one using a messaging app. She tried to install apps, but the
| app store progress thing was just spinning. With no indication as
| to what she was doing wrong. Turns out she just needed to upgrade
| to the latest iOS. And the instructions that I had looked up
| before buying the iPad on how to copy PDFs to an iPad have been
| deprecated as of the latest iTunes release. And iCloud Drive's
| upload button is greyed out, with the tooltip informing us that
| _uploading is disabled_. Since I can't travel 1000 miles to help
| her out in person, the fact that I have to debug this over a
| video call is even worse.
|
| Why is copying a file such a hard thing to do? Why is updating
| the iPad something my mother would have to think about? This is
| the UX I'd expect from some cheap Samsung tablet, yet I'm sure
| that with a Samsung tablet, copying a file onto a device over USB
| wouldn't be an issue.
| jmrm wrote:
| I haven't done something like that on an iPad, but I think that
| Apple want people to use these devices in a way that every app
| have their files, like for example iPods used to store the
| music (you could drop files on the iPod storage but you need
| iTunes to insert your MP3s on the "player app").
|
| The best thing you could do is looking for a tutorial to do
| that, and also a software to control that iPad remotely, so you
| don't have to videocall your mother to give her instructions.
| armincerf wrote:
| You can plug any usb device into an iPad and use the files app
| to copy stuff over? I use an external usb c ssd with my iPad
| for my photography work flow. file management has come a long
| way in the past couple of years.
|
| If it's just pdfs I would probably email them though
| shp0ngle wrote:
| macOS app installation is broken for about 20 years now. It's not
| a new thing.
|
| Instead of clicking "next-next-next" as you do on Windows, you
| have at least 3 competing versions of installing things.
|
| * you have pkg installers (sometimes zipped, sometimes just .pkg
| files)
|
| * you have those .app bundles that you need to manually move to
| Application (they are sometimes in a zip and sometimes in a DMG,
| further complicating things)
|
| * you now also have an app store (that keeps requiring you to
| enter iCloud password - different from OS password - all the time
| for some weird reason)
|
| And don't try to even _uninstall_ anything.
|
| * app store apps are uninstalled by ... holding them in Launchpad
| view, which is never needed anywhere else
|
| * other apps... just are not un-installable, really.
| viktorcode wrote:
| The whole idea that programs have to be _installed_ to run and
| _uninstalled_ when no longer needed shows how many people were
| trained (mostly by Microsoft) to follow along the lines of poor
| user experience. As it is the norm, people call that
| 'intuitive'.
| goldcd wrote:
| I wouldn't say MS has 'completely' sovlved the installer
| problem.
|
| "Just download the windows version"
|
| 'OK.. am I x86, x64 or ARM? I think it's Windows 10'
|
| 'Do I want the zip, the exe, the MSI or standalone?'
|
| It's _almost_ enough just to tell them to use the MS app store.
| cytzol wrote:
| This post illuminates two ways in which users' expectations of
| computers have changed since the '80s, which is when this UX was
| designed:
|
| 1) Users don't deal with external storage _nearly_ as much
| anymore, so the "disk image" paradigm feels out of place. Before
| the Internet, it was more common to insert a floppy disk, drag
| the application from the disk to the hard drive, and then eject
| it again. Users were accustomed to opening and ejecting disks
| based on the icons on the desktop, so when disk images started to
| be a thing, it worked exactly like floppies did.
|
| 2) Users think of applications that have to be explicitly
| installed, rather than just copied, like any other kind of file.
|
| The second one is the _really_ surprising one: when we think of
| how to get applications onto our computers these days, the word
| is "install". You need to install a program before you can start
| using it. On Windows, you ran an installer program. On Linux, you
| ran a command. How else can you do it?
|
| But on Classic Mac, an application was just a special kind of
| file, which you could drag, drop, and manipulate just like any
| other kind of file.
|
| It didn't even need to be in the Applications folder! You could
| put it in a subdirectory, you could put it on the Desktop, you
| could put it wherever you liked, and it would work just the same.
| I think it's a darn shame that this isn't a guarantee anymore.
| The other day, I tried putting all of the Microsoft Office
| applications into /Applications/Office instead of just in
| /Applications, and the next time the Office updater ran, it
| installed into /Applications, even though that's not where the
| apps lived, so now I had two copies of everything. Bleh.
|
| Why is this so much better than running a program or running a
| command? Well, think about how you would _uninstall_ a program.
| On Windows, you 'd have to run an uninstaller or find the entry
| in Add/Remove programs; on Linux, you'd have to run a different
| command. In both cases, you'd have to do something you hadn't
| done before -- you have to know how to do something before you
| can do it. On Classic Mac OS, you can just delete the application
| by dragging it to the Trash -- something you already know how to
| do.
|
| Anyway, I'm not defending this approach to installing
| applications. But I do think it made sense at the time, and the
| computing landscape changed around it.
| sudosysgen wrote:
| But you haven't described how to uninstall an app. You
| described how to remove the program directory, which would be
| the same as deleting the folder in Program File on windows.
|
| Changes to system config won't be rolled back and other files
| won't be cleaned up.
|
| That's why on Mac OS you sometimes have to get an uninstaller,
| which sucks because now you have an inconsistency.
| AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
| > Changes to system config won't be rolled back and other
| files won't be cleaned up.
|
| These didn't exist on the original Macs[0], and I would argue
| that they shouldn't exist on any Desktop OS.
|
| [0] Unless you count Extensions, which were still drag-and-
| drop but to a special folder under System.
| AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
| > It didn't even need to be in the Applications folder! You
| could put it in a subdirectory, you could put it on the
| Desktop, you could put it wherever you liked, and it would work
| just the same. I think it's a darn shame that this isn't a
| guarantee anymore.
|
| It is even worse than that, many applications these days cannot
| even be installed anywhere other than the default location! At
| least on Windows you used to be able to do that with a high
| degree of reliability.
|
| I think the original Mac did it right and everyone else who
| didn't do the same thing (RiscOS, NeXT kinda) is doing it
| completely wrong. Which is why I'm a fan of AppImage when I
| have to use Linux Desktop and "portable" applications when I
| use Windows. I don't use modern MacOS.
| ftio wrote:
| Spot on. I had a similar thought.
|
| Another major change is that the App Store is now the default
| way for 99% of users to download and install software. Pre-App
| Store (say, in the Tiger-Snow Leopard days), Mac users with
| even limited experience knew the `Mount DMG - Drag to
| Applications` ritual. At the time, it was one of the two
| primary ways of installing Mac software, the other being using
| Package Installer to run .pkg installations.
|
| As a Certified Technical Consultant in those days, I found that
| almost everyone was able to do the Package Manager method; the
| DMG method created a lot of chaos for about 50% of people.
| You'd find people running Firefox or Chrome from the DMG, which
| they'd leave mounted and visible on their desktops in
| perpetuity.
|
| As a Windows switcher (in 2006) I always felt that the drag-
| and-drop model was really elegant, but it was unintuitive
| because, to your point, I had been exposed to the installation
| model for so long.
| Izkata wrote:
| > As a Windows switcher (in 2006) I always felt that the
| drag-and-drop model was really elegant, but it was
| unintuitive because, to your point, I had been exposed to the
| installation model for so long.
|
| https://portableapps.com/ started around that time: builds of
| open source programs that ran out of a directory without any
| installation. They were meant for flash drives, but worked
| just from the desktop or wherever as well.
| voussoir wrote:
| I avoid installers and prefer portable releases 100% of the
| time. Sometimes, you can extract an installer like a zip and it
| still works. Other times, I suffer through the install process
| once and then zip up the resulting folder to get my own
| portable for next time. I think it's crazy how even the
| simplest of programs today want to run installers.
|
| I wrote more about it here:
| https://voussoir.net/writing/master_of_my_domain
| richrichardsson wrote:
| I'm not sure I agree with this at all.
|
| Just to test I donwloaded the .dmg for Chrome.
|
| Like _A LOT_ of .dmg based "installers" there is a Chrome
| application and a link to /Applications, with a nice obvious
| "arrow" between them.
|
| I've always found this to be pretty self evident that I must put
| the Chrome app into the Applications folder.
| jermaustin1 wrote:
| My sister interpreted that as drag it onto the application icon
| that was in her task bar, so she kept trying to drag it onto
| the App Store icon because it looked kind of similar.
| bombcar wrote:
| Yeah, it's easy to understand if you already understand it
| (some will have a "Drag to Applications" text to help) - but
| I prefer the applications where if you start it from the DMG
| it asks if you'd like to move it to Applications, and then
| does so and ejects the DMG for you.
|
| How many times have we found a friend's Mac with 10-20 DMGs
| mounted?
| rasfincher wrote:
| I'm convinced 90% of my love of the Mac was the customizing I had
| done to it.
| NicoJuicy wrote:
| Glad this popped up.
|
| I'm a Windows user and had to help a Mac user. Let's just say Mac
| definitely is my cup of tea.
|
| And since those that i was helping ( an architect and a large
| property owner) didn't even remember their password to install an
| application.
|
| I wouldn't consider them a actual user of the OS either ( just a
| consumer).
|
| If they have OS X, they are free to search for someone who can
| actually help them, but it's not me. And it's almost the first
| thing i say on the phone.
| irrational wrote:
| I think it really depends on what you are used to. I used Windows
| up through Windows XP, but in the early 2000s I got a job where
| they only used Macs, so I have solely used OSX/MacOS for nearly
| 20 years. Recently someone asked me for help with their Windows
| 10 machine. I was lost. I felt like a complete novice to the
| world of computers. I couldn't find anything and it took forever
| to figure out how to help this person. I finally had to resort to
| googling the issue and finding some step by step instructions. I
| don't think this is because Windows is less intuitive than MacOS.
| I think it is just a matter of what you are used to becomes
| intuitive.
| kevinob11 wrote:
| Interestingly after reading other comments I think I agree that
| it isn't very intuitive. I say that as someone who switched from
| windows to mac about 6 years ago and don't really want to go
| back.
|
| I think Windows is more intuitive when you first sit down in
| front of it. You click an app and it opens, click it again and
| you get another one (usually). All context for the app is on the
| window for the app, physically connected. The start menu allows
| you to get to almost everything, things are in 5 different places
| on a mac (dock, spotlight, apple menu, etc.). I think all of that
| adds up to make windows vastly more intuitive (discoverable?),
| especially for a first time user.
|
| Where I really love my mac is in the first tier of shortcuts and
| features below the discoverable level. I find the hotkeys to be
| more reachable and intuitive (easy for my brain to remember the
| associations) than the windows equivalents. I love spotlight and
| find it to be much better at opening programs than windows
| search, though this seems largely fixed in windows 10 I think. I
| really like the swipe gestures on my touchpad, enough that I
| bought a magic trackpad for use when at a desk. Swiping between
| workspaces is glorious. I'm a consultant, and jump between client
| meetings all the time. I set up each client in a workspace and
| just slide over to that workspace when I'm ready for that meeting
| or work session. Then I can jump to the next client without
| cleaning up and just do a full cleanup later in the day of all of
| them at once.
|
| I have no idea how I lived before cmd+left and cmd+right go to
| start and end of line without taking a hand off the home row to
| reach over to home / end. As I say this though I realize the
| arrow keys are just below home and end, so maybe it's weird that
| I love this. Better on a mobile keyboard I suppose.
|
| I'm not someone who could never see going back to windows, I like
| it plenty, but the M1 has probably locked me in for the next few
| years.
| flohofwoe wrote:
| My favourite Mac-ism is dragging an USB-stick icon onto the
| Trashcan to safely remove it.
|
| I wish macOS would steal some ideas from Windows instead of iOS.
| And Windows really needs to stop stealing ideas from macOS, macOS
| hasn't been on the forefront of UX since at least the late 90's.
| turkeywelder wrote:
| Recent M1 user here - I had a PowerPC mac back in the
| Leopard/Tiger days. I thought OSx would have come on leaps and
| bounds since then.
|
| It's....more or less unchanged. As well as this crazy installer
| thing, there's quite a bit about Macs that just seems off.. My
| list of "things that don't seem right" as a long term
| Windows/ChromeOS user
|
| - Window snapping isn't built in outside of fullscreen mode
| (seriously?!)
|
| - Sleeping the mac does not sleep the mac, it wakes up at all
| sorts of times
|
| - Every time the OS updates, I have to go through a setup process
| again, trying to upsell me on iCloud drive. Nothing updates as
| nicely as ChromeOS but I'd hope for at least a reboot and back to
| where I left off
|
| - TouchID for login works....but not often enough - it constantly
| pesters me for a password
|
| - Pressing enter renames a file rather than opens it. What?
|
| - The Finder is either named ironically or I'm not getting it -
| file paths are obscured, seeing file details is hidden behind a
| dialog.
|
| We bought the M1 because ChromeOS didn't like our old Samsung
| printer and the VPN software my partner uses and Google had
| killed the update life for it for...reasons. In an expensive
| lesson of "whoops", the Mac doesn't like the printer either.
|
| A lot of this is me getting back into it and getting used to
| things, but I sort of miss ChromeOS.
|
| In Apple's defence, the hardware is amazing and the bluetooth is
| fantastic. Could have put a port on either side to make charging
| nicer though.
| robertoandred wrote:
| > The Finder is either named ironically or I'm not getting it -
| file paths are obscured, seeing file details is hidden behind a
| dialog.
|
| View -> Show Path Bar and Show Preview
| tomp wrote:
| > - Pressing enter renames a file rather than opens it. What?
|
| Press _space_ instead... mostly will "open" the file (preview
| it).
| pmx wrote:
| cmd and down arrow to actually open it. I'm used to it now
| but it still annoys me!
| m463 wrote:
| I always use cmd-o - never knew about cmd-down - it seems
| to do the same thing - why a different keystroke?
| andreynering wrote:
| > Sleeping the mac does not sleep the mac, it wakes up at all
| sorts of times
|
| This can be improved a bit by forcing the Mac to "hibernate"
| instead of suspend when you put it to sleep:
|
| https://apple.stackexchange.com/a/51729
|
| By default, it would hibernate only after some time.
|
| You can also disable the "Power Nap" checkbox on Settings >
| Battery.
|
| EDIT: Typo
| sjg007 wrote:
| How performant is chromeos? I'm thinking of getting one as it
| is basically linux.
| turkeywelder wrote:
| In our use it was perfectly fine, it'll run fine with 4gb of
| ram and a Celeron. I wouldn't want to do hardcore software
| dev on one because they're usually low end screens and CPUs,
| but as a "here's a safe machine you can't break" they're
| absolutely brilliant for family.
|
| Boot time is instant, OS updates are instant, battery life is
| great, if there was ever "linux for the desktop" it's
| ChromeOS.
|
| It's not all roses though: full disclosure: our Chromebook is
| stuck on Chrome 68 so these might not apply any more.
|
| - The file management is poor, a zip file can and will
| confuse it
|
| - Bluetooth is Windows XP levels of stable, if you get a
| device it likes you're good, but it can be finicky.
|
| - The device has a fixed expiry date where they stop getting
| software updates, this is the big kicker for me, because we
| had a perfectly functional machine that was a bit old that
| just got turned into E waste because nobody wanted to support
| the software any more. Shame because it was a fantastic
| machine. I'm hoping our Mac lasts longer than the Chromebook
| it's replacing
| tanaros wrote:
| I have no experience with this, but you may be able to
| install Neverware CloudReady on the old Chromebook to
| extend its life.
| bayindirh wrote:
| > Window snapping isn't built in outside of fullscreen mode
| (seriously?!)
|
| You can just install Magnet. It's a little unobtrusive app
| which can do neat things with windows.
|
| > Sleeping the mac does not sleep the mac, it wakes up at all
| sorts of times
|
| Power Nap is useful. When I open my Mac in the morning
| everything is updated from mail to apps. It doesn't turn on
| fans on older Macs for smaller tasks too. You can turn it off.
|
| > Every time the OS updates, I have to go through a setup
| process again, trying to upsell me on iCloud drive. Nothing
| updates as nicely as ChromeOS but I'd hope for at least a
| reboot and back to where I left off
|
| I don't experience this except once-in-a-year release updates.
| Even in that case OS state including all the applications'
| state is restored for the last 6-7 years or so.
|
| > TouchID for login works....but not often enough - it
| constantly pesters me for a password
|
| Unless Touch-ID is disabled for something (long sleep, location
| change, reboot, etc.) It never failed to recognize my finger.
|
| > Pressing enter renames a file rather than opens it. What?
|
| This is a bit backwards at first, but when considered, it's
| logical. command+down enters the folders and files (and opens
| them in the corresponding application).
|
| > The Finder is either named ironically or I'm not getting it -
| file paths are obscured, seeing file details is hidden behind a
| dialog.
|
| Finder is neither advanced nor explicit like KDE's dolphin or a
| more advanced file manager like forklift, but it's hidden
| features are plenty. Also, the search engine (Spotlight) can
| find everything, so in fact Finder really finds. Just let it
| search.
|
| As a Linux and Mac user, Windows feels off for a very long time
| for me. Mac feels more natural and Linux most flexible and
| verbose. At the end of the day, macOS has the most efficient
| use of space and allows deep productivity with less friction.
| This is my experience after using both for more than 15 years.
|
| Moreover, I've found that trackpad gestures of MacBooks neatly
| integrate into daily routine and they disappear by becoming
| instinct. This is one of the best sides of apple ecosystem. One
| can use the device without thinking about using it. It provides
| enormous speed gains.
| tomduncalf wrote:
| > command+down enters the folders and files
|
| Or Cmd+O, which feels easier to remember to me (o = open)
| cuddlybacon wrote:
| >> TouchID for login works....but not often enough - it
| constantly pesters me for a password
|
| > Unless Touch-ID is disabled for something (long sleep,
| location change, reboot, etc.) It never failed to recognize
| my finger.
|
| Touch-ID will periodically demand the password. I've always
| guessed this is done so you don't end up forgetting it. It
| also demands the password on reboot.
|
| I wonder if the person you are replying to is rebooting a
| lot.
| coldtea wrote:
| > _- Window snapping isn 't built in outside of fullscreen mode
| (seriously?!)_
|
| As if that's a major future? (seriously?!)
|
| > _- Sleeping the mac does not sleep the mac, it wakes up at
| all sorts of times_
|
| It sleeps just fine for me, across half a dozen of Macs over 2
| decades.
|
| > _- TouchID for login works....but not often enough - it
| constantly pesters me for a password_
|
| Like the first time after a boot/login?
|
| > _- Pressing enter renames a file rather than opens it. What?_
|
| What what?
|
| > _- The Finder is either named ironically or I 'm not getting
| it - file paths are obscured, seeing file details is hidden
| behind a dialog._
|
| And most people care about paths (as opposed to navigating to
| folders they created or searching for files) because?
|
| The rest can always enabled to show the paths.
|
| > _We bought the M1 because ChromeOS didn 't like our old
| Samsung printer and the VPN software my partner uses._
|
| Maybe just buy a different printer instead of a new computer?
|
| A lot of the complaints are "it's not what some other OS does".
| turkeywelder wrote:
| > Like the first time after a boot/login?
|
| More often than that - I knew it'd ask on fresh boot, but
| this is after switching users or just a night where it
| pretends to sleep. I'm still tracking it down and figuring
| out the scenarios. I'm not averse to it as an OS, I just want
| to understand why it's done something when it has.
| luka-birsa wrote:
| Love the "It works for me" ethos. Very popular amongst us IT
| guys. Sadly not much help to the OP.
|
| If we want to have better products, we need to address issues
| that people have using them. Apple UX is slowly eroding over
| time, to the point that I planned to move to Windows camp
| after the forced replacement of my MBP.
|
| Sadly or thankfully M1 really helped to put a curb into those
| plans :).
| perardi wrote:
| _Sleeping the mac does not sleep the mac, it wakes up at all
| sorts of times_
|
| This sure used to work.
|
| My 16-inch MacBook Pro (as in, the new keyboard model) just
| does not want to stay asleep if the screen is open. Even if I
| put it in Do Not Disturb mode, notifications (like my nightly
| reminder to take my melatonin) wake it up, seemingly no matter
| what option I toggle.
| andreasley wrote:
| My 16-inch MacBook Pro sleeps just fine.
|
| I assume you have Power Nap disabled and no devices attached
| that try to wake the MacBook?
| perardi wrote:
| ...son of a...
|
| Oh that's embarrassing. I do still have Power Nap enabled.
|
| Well let's give that a shot. Thanks for the reminder about
| that option.
| rubyist5eva wrote:
| Window snapping exists in macOS, hold the option key while
| hovering over the zoom button and the snapping options pop up
| in a tooltip.
|
| Personally, I like that macOS is more or less unchanged. It's
| familiar, and I don't have to worry about big sweeping changes
| like Windows 8 or Gnome 3 and Gnome 40.
|
| For everything else there's usually a tiny utility app you can
| install the gives you the functionality and runs in the
| background using very little resources.
| turkeywelder wrote:
| ohh that option thing is well hidden, thanks for that. Is
| there a keyboard shortcut for it?
| rubyist5eva wrote:
| I haven't found one but I never really dug into the
| keyboard shortcut settings because I use Rectangle anyway.
| adolph wrote:
| As long time Mac and relatively recent cross platform user,
| native window snapping is a joke in macOS made tolerable by
| Magnet. Option just changes the green button mode from new
| workspace (or whatever its called) to whole screen. In most
| Windows OSes the eponymous key plus an arrow will cycle the
| UI window through helpful positions of whole, half, quarter.
|
| The sibling comment challenges the parent regarding the
| importance of window snapping. I used to think it wasn't a
| big deal. I was accustomed to mousing windows here and there
| and seeing bits of other things behind. After using iOS I
| have a new appreciation for focus, simplicity and reduced
| non-functional effort.
|
| A significant amount of user-time in a standard desktop GUI
| is spent changing application and window contexts. Why
| wouldn't it be as much a first class concern as brushed metal
| and lickability?
|
| https://apps.apple.com/us/app/magnet/id441258766?mt=12
| mirthflat83 wrote:
| I have honestly never felt the need for snapping for almost
| a decade. Just use multiple monitors if you really need
| that screen estate
| adolph wrote:
| Poor window management isn't a great argument for more
| monitors. That's just using your neck to make up for a
| deficient UI.
| rubyist5eva wrote:
| > Option just changes the green button mode from new
| workspace (or whatever its called) to whole screen.
|
| Hover for a second, a tooltip will pop-up for left-snap and
| right-snap. If you don't hold Option it does the workspace
| version like iPad where it splits into a new workspace.
| alexeiz wrote:
| He praises the quality of the Apple hardware... He should watch
| Louis Rossmann's Mac repair videos on Youtube. Apple hardware
| design is crap. There are hardware design mistakes Louis points
| out that only rookies would do. Mac repair business is
| flourishing for a reason (even though Apple is trying to squash
| it by any means possible).
| dsabanin wrote:
| Stopped reading after "and I still think windows is the superior
| operating system".
| Helmut10001 wrote:
| I agree. We should all head over to Linux. However, Windows+WSL
| is indeed a valid alternative to Linux only. Never considered
| Mac.
| echelon wrote:
| Is that an invalid opinion?
|
| I'm forced to use Mac at work, and I find both Windows and
| Linux to be more powerful and less constrained as technical
| work environments.
|
| Too much of MacOS is designed around hiding functionality and
| protecting non-technical users, but the way they do it is
| uneven and awkward. Building code requires you to accept
| license agreements in ten different inconsistent places, you
| have to hit hotkeys to delete things or mark them as
| executable. File paths are hidden unless you jump through
| hoops, Apple is always shoving Safari and iTunes down your
| throat, the context menu is littered with useless garbage like
| "Look up X", the desktop environment requires 3rd party plugins
| for power use, XCode is the single worst IDE I've ever had to
| use, ...
|
| Finder is the _worst_ file browser in the world. This is
| probably my top complaint and sums up why Apple is so
| frustrating. It 's like Apple is trying to hide information
| from you and gives me the impression that they only care about
| the superficial appearance of their Finder app over its actual
| functionality. Explorer and Nautilus are miles better in every
| use case: finding files, listing files, managing files,
| navigating directory trees, mounting remove volumes, ... Finder
| makes all of these tasks incredibly tedious, hiding them as
| much as possible so the app looks minimal and uncluttered. It's
| horrible.
|
| Apple even removed the escape key from their laptops at one
| point, which should go to show you that technical users are not
| their primary audience.
|
| I'd recommend Mac for editing text documents, but not much
| else. Even file management feels second class to the point I'd
| want to work on video and 3d workflows in Windows instead. I'd
| never want to program on a Mac.
| jermaustin1 wrote:
| I'm glad you made it almost to the end :) - thanks for at least
| reading that far.
| perryizgr8 wrote:
| I get confused and irritated all the time by the inconsistent
| behavior of the home, end, page up and page down keys. Sometimes
| ends takes you to the end of the line, sometimes it scrolls to
| the bottom of the page, sometimes it does nothing. Sometimes
| Ctrl+right arrow is end, sometimes Cmd+right arrow and other
| times even fn+right arrow. It's just a huge mess. And who thought
| having no delete key was fine? And then they went and mislabeled
| backspace as delete! WTF!
| bdcravens wrote:
| I wouldn't call it intuitive, but highly consistent.
| chovybizzass wrote:
| my mom (76) hated the mac when i got her one...so I installed
| ubuntu and she hated that too....back to windows vista. lol
| mancerayder wrote:
| What hurts me (or maybe I'm blind or a dummy) is, it's not
| obvious which window is in focus because the dock doesn't
| highlight anything. The dock has a little dot under the icon if
| it's running, but that's all you get. Most of the icons have the
| same dot, but aren't in focus. This can be confusing. Windows
| highlights the running program in the start bar. Also, Windows
| lets you minimize or restore by clicking on that. The Dock is
| inferior to the Windows equivalent jn functionality. One hopes
| it's made up with the window/taskbar at the top.
| cstross wrote:
| Youngsters these days!
|
| Back in the 1980s and 90s, the differences between MacOS and
| Windows were as day and night. (Windows 1 didn't even support
| overlapping windows. Windows 3 had weird stuff like icons that
| didn't map to underlying filesystem objects so when you dragged a
| "file" to the "trash" you weren't actually deleting a file, you
| were deleting a symbolic representation of the file. Windows put
| a separate menu bar in every window, unlike MacOS, which was a
| significant waste of screen real estate back in an age when VGA
| -- 480x640 pixel -- screens were normal. And Windows font
| handling was horrendous.)
|
| Circa Windows 95, Microsoft found workarounds for the most
| obstructive of Apple and Xerox's patents on GUIs. There were
| still weird differences, though. Mac had pull-down menus, Windows
| had drop-down. (Today, macOS has drop-down menus because that
| ship sailed decades ago.)
|
| Anyway, the story of macOS vs. Windows is one of convergent
| evolution over a period of about 3 decades, and in the meantime,
| each of those operating systems has been substantially replaced
| under the hood -- Windows is no longer a graphical shell running
| on top of DOS, and MacOS is no longer a cooperative-tasking 68000
| based system: Windows has VMS heritage rather than DOS, and Mac
| has BSD UNIX heritage rather than MacOS.
|
| TLDR: in the age of the dinosaurs (1984-94) Macs clearly _were_
| easier to learn and use than Windows. Today, not so much.
| amelius wrote:
| I remember having to use iTunes to update the OS on one family
| Apple PC. Crazy experience.
| cmrdporcupine wrote:
| The second coming of Jobs came along with a transition from "The
| computer for the rest of us", and "Easy to use" to "Think
| Different", "Lickable" and eventaully luxury lifestlye branding.
|
| It's understandably hard to market a computer with the line that
| it is "easy to use" -- customers don't want to feel "stupid." And
| Apple has had a lot more financial success as a computing analog
| to BMW, Mercedes, Miele, Bosch, etc. than as the "friendly
| computer."
|
| The transition to OS X came with a focus on "it just works"
| rather than "easy to use" -- and from my perspective many things,
| like the Finder and window management, became more difficult than
| in classic Mac OS.
|
| NeXTstep was a powerful operating system for power users
| (marketed towards education and science, not your mom and dad.)
| Its focus was not on ease of use, though it did have a consistent
| high quality GUI (better than OS X, IMHO). Mac OS X is in many
| ways just a reskinning of NeXTstep.
|
| (IMHO the Lisa Office System was the height of usable, intuitive,
| usable Apple GUIs.)
|
| Finally, Apple has an intuitive easy to use operating system to
| sell, and it makes them a lot more money than Macs do: iOS.
| travelbyphone wrote:
| I switched from windows to Mac in 2005 and find macOS second
| nature now.
|
| Finder is getting a lot of heat here, but I live it's simplicity.
| Column view is the best view, quick look is amazing and I don't
| know how one can live without it on other OSes. I know a million
| tricks but one that I see as really superior is how you can drag
| a folder to a save menu in order to quickly access it to save the
| file. Also macOS is smart enough to have two files with the same
| name open. And you can even move them while open.
|
| One feature I believe not many people use but I can't go by
| without is active corners. It just makes Mac OS so fluid with
| your mouse, it's a beauty.
| whatever1 wrote:
| Window management is even greater s*show. To the point that you
| need 3rd party apps to make it usable.
| jermaustin1 wrote:
| I actually gave up on having my windows maximized, or side by
| side, they are now just all overlapping, and its whatever. I
| try to keep a portion of every window visible on the screen so
| I can quickly click between them, it looks like a disorganized
| mess, but it is MY disorganized mess.
| mjburgess wrote:
| err... try "Spectacle"
| Rebelgecko wrote:
| Rectangle is another great tool in the same vein (and it's
| still actively being developed)
| city41 wrote:
| And even then it doesn't work very well. The problem is the app
| remains in control, unlike in say Xorg where the window manager
| has the final say. When I used a Mac I found many apps outright
| ignored the window manager.
| wraptile wrote:
| It's absolutely awful. My 2500$ macbook's window processing is
| at least 10 times slower than my 250$ thinkpad with linux. It's
| insane that such simple things don't work on such an
| established and valuable brand.
| arolihas wrote:
| The fact that you can't create a key binding for a window or
| even name it is ridiculous.
| bassdropvroom wrote:
| I could be mistaken but I'm pretty sure you can't name
| windows in Gnome, KDE, and Windows either.
| bscphil wrote:
| You can change the window title in X, though chances are
| the window manager will just change it back next time it's
| refreshed. xprop -f _NET_WM_NAME 8u -set
| _NET_WM_NAME "New Window Name"
|
| I'm not sure why anyone would do this, and I'm also not
| sure what the GP comment means by "naming windows" anyway.
| KDE does allow assigning shortcuts to windows, but I've
| never used this either.
| killtimeatwork wrote:
| If the app lauching the window is placed as an icon in the
| task bar, you can pop its window app with Windows + (number
| of icon, counting from the start menu button). It doesn't
| work for some misbehaving apps which I guess didn't bother to
| do proper windows integration (Spyder IDE is one such
| example), but overall works great.
| ARandumGuy wrote:
| Wait, what? I never new you could do that! That's a super
| nice feature.
| musicale wrote:
| > And at this I realized how silly the entire install process for
| Mac is.
|
| Apple Menu > App Store > Search > Buy > Install > Open
|
| It's basically the same as iOS.
| coldtea wrote:
| > _they ARE NOT that intuitive unless you live on the App Store,
| or only consume the Apple-made software which might be fine for
| 70% of the population, but the moment one ventures outside of the
| walled garden, one might get lost._
|
| Well, condidering the different ways to do the same thing in
| Windows and Linux, it's still quite easy.
|
| But admittedly it could be easier.
| throwawayboise wrote:
| I think it 90% what you are used to. If you're used to using
| Windows, it's intuitive. If you're used to MacOS, same.
|
| I was used to Microsoft Office, then they added the Ribbon. I
| know it's been years and years but I still feel it's unintuitive.
|
| I'm used to Android. Whenever I need to do something on an iPhone
| I'm lost.
|
| It's all just what you know.
| js2 wrote:
| The macOS user guide:
|
| https://support.apple.com/guide/mac-help/welcome/mac
| mrexroad wrote:
| The only "intuitive" interface is the nipple. After that it's all
| learned. -- Bruce Ediger
|
| Reality: "There is no intuitive interface, not even the nipple.
| It's all learned."
| bumbada wrote:
| Very few things are intuitive. Is it intuitive to brush your
| teeth? No it is not. I spent years brushing my teeth incorrectly
| and paid for that as a kid until a dentist showed it to me.
|
| Is it intuitive to tie your shoelaces? No, you learn it. Your tie
| knot?
|
| Is it intuitive learning to read and write? No, it takes years of
| practice.
|
| Is it intuitive memorizing the presidents or the States of the
| US, the capitals and countries of the world? I had to learn to
| memorize much more effective as an adult in order to do things
| like learning Chinese script. As a kid nobody taught me how to
| memorize well and I did poorly. As an adult I look like a genius
| compared with others.
|
| Is it intuitive all the Spanish compound verb tenses, or German
| people compound separated verbs at the end? No it is not, but
| Spaniards or Germans do it naturally and without effort.
|
| I find the mac idiosyncrasies way easier to understand than the
| Microsoft Windows ones.
|
| When I used Windows I used to to the things one way, like going
| to Control panel, devices or whatever, only for the next version
| to change it, or having Clippy then removing Clippy, for shutting
| down the computer do something, and now with surface is something
| different.
|
| Most people comply about macs however because they have only used
| Windows for a long time, and they are used to it, like a German
| complying that compound verbs are together and he is used to
| ending the phrases with them,backwards.
| quacked wrote:
| How did you learn to memorize more effectively?
| LambdaComplex wrote:
| Well now I'm worried that I'm brushing my teeth wrong. What
| were you doing wrong?
| ppetty wrote:
| I would love to see a post like this that depicts all the ways
| you can install on Windows, macOS & Linux (as both a consumer &
| developer). The DMG experience is a little off as the author
| suggests & the App store is super easy (as are shared purchases).
| I briefly set up a Mac mini to use Ubuntu & Mint and found Snap
| and other ways of installing much more cumbersome; especially
| when I installed something and wanted an app shortcut to appear
| in a specific menu (sounds simple but was inconsistent). I'm not
| that familiar with Windows these days, but is downloading an .exe
| that different from a .dmg? Is the Windows store as easy as the
| App Store? Or are there particular apps' websites that don't do a
| great job explaining how to install their software?
| AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
| > I briefly set up a Mac mini to use Ubuntu & Mint and found
| Snap and other ways of installing much more cumbersome;
| especially when I installed something and wanted an app
| shortcut to appear in a specific menu (sounds simple but was
| inconsistent).
|
| I personally find it infuriating how Linux manages to screw
| this up. I blame a lot of things, like the propensity to
| hardcode paths and separate files by type leading to the (in my
| opinion) _awful_ .desktop file standard. In older versions of
| Windows, the menu was just a menuized view of a folder
| structure (which largely contained shortucts but could contain
| anything).
| lbriner wrote:
| I think my pet peeve is the icons in the Finder. I don't consider
| them intuitive in the slightest, you just have to learn what they
| are by Googling it or clicking them.
|
| I also learn about hidden key strokes for navigating the Finder
| to actually find stuff. Very useful once you learn them but
| otherwise they are hidden away so it seems virtually impossible
| to see the file system as a single entity.
| PennRobotics wrote:
| I transitioned from Ubuntu to Mac for work. As others here
| stated, there are often keystroke and click combinations that do
| perform many tasks a user might want, and it's clear this isn't
| the main problem. In almost every case, my first ten guesses for
| a particular action would be wrong: deleting URL suggestions,
| split screen, forward delete, open terminal, switching windows
| within an application, search and replace, and so on.
|
| My opinion goes deeper. There's a fundamental problem of
| aesthetics over functionality in Apple's designs. As I sat in
| front of my fresh workplace iMac, I had no idea how to turn the
| machine on. I looked in the back and didn't notice anything other
| than ports. I looked on the edge... the front... the back
| again... the front again... the screen...
|
| Finally, I took my phone three levels higher in the building
| where I knew I got 2G signal. The power button on an dark grey
| iMac---I discovered after 15 minutes---is in a bottom corner of
| the back, essentially flush with the rest of the monitor body in
| the place a person is least likely to look.
|
| The fact that multiple prominent websites exist with this
| information tells me all I need to know about whether Don Norman
| would state Apple makes intuitive products or not.
| gandalfian wrote:
| I think apple lost interest in the desktop years ago and are
| eternally surprised it's still lasting, run as an afterthough.
| Why is deleting a file from a usb stick to free up space so
| fiddly? No one has ever taken the time to really think through
| how things work.
| enos_feedler wrote:
| Are you fucking kidding? How do you explain the M1?
| Nextgrid wrote:
| M1 can be explained by consolidating iOS and macOS so that
| less effort is spent on the desktop. M1 machines are very
| close to iPhones when it comes to the boot process and
| security model, and iOS features are now infiltrating the
| desktop like widgets and even the ability to run iOS apps on
| desktop (used to be Marzipan/Catalyst but it still meant the
| apps had to be compiled for it, but now macOS on M1 is
| technically capable of running raw iOS apps directly).
| enos_feedler wrote:
| M1 is about capturing growth in the
| laptop/desktop/workstation market, it isn't about cost
| savings a dying market. Consolidation isn't the right word.
| It's about taking their mobile "opinions" and saying if we
| bring these to the desktop we can grow the market. The ROI
| does not make sense otherwise. Might as well pay Intel and
| keep milking it then.
| CarVac wrote:
| I find the dock terribly unintuitive every time I use a Mac.
| kristofferR wrote:
| How so? It can't get much more intuitive in my view, it's a
| collection of your favorite apps with dots under each running
| one.
| echelon wrote:
| Then why do I have to keep unpinning iTunes? Why does it come
| back when I remove it?
|
| Why does it only have colorful icons instead of icons+text? I
| use a bunch of IDEs that visually look the same, but their
| functionality is wildly different. This is a usability
| nightmare.
| [deleted]
| speeder wrote:
| I concluded Mac interface designers are out of touch with reality
| when I found out that to "eject" pendrives you had to drag them
| to the trash bin.
|
| I mean, now they do show a convenient "eject" symbol next to the
| name of the remove-able drive on the Finder, but the "drag to
| trash" thing still work, and it always surprises people, they
| always assume it means you want to delete all files in a disk,
| not that you want to eject the disk.
| selimthegrim wrote:
| That has been around since classic MacOS
| jbverschoor wrote:
| It's to "remove the icon from the desktop"
| IshKebab wrote:
| That doesn't really make it any more reasonable.
| Isthatablackgsd wrote:
| Or you could use [?]+E to eject it.
| thunderbong wrote:
| That's not really the correct answer from the user experience
| perspective, is it?
| bsanr2 wrote:
| It IS a good way to ingrain a behavior that, when used on a
| Windows system, will bias the user forever.
| FabHK wrote:
| To be fair, it all makes sense if you a) adopt the view that an
| application is just a file like any other, and b) remember the
| pre-network days: to install a program, you insert a disk, and
| then just pull (=copy) the program from the disk to where you
| keep your applications.
|
| And with the internet and downloads, the process has not changed
| much except that the disk is replaced by a disk image.
|
| With that mental image, the process seems straightforward enough.
| And the App store, of course, enables one-click installation as
| on smartphones.
|
| So, I guess the impediments are that people don't know how to
| deal with disks and disk images, and the idea that one ought to
| "install" software, rather than just copying to where one wants
| it.
| mcv wrote:
| For a long time I enjoyed my late 2011 unibody Macbook Pro, and
| it was pretty great. Certainly more intuitive than anything from
| Windows or Linux at the time.
|
| It died a few years ago. I recently got a Macbook Pro from work,
| and weird stuff just keeps happening. I'm happily doing
| something, and suddenly everything goes all wobbly, or something
| suddenly zooms in. I have to put effort into hunting down the
| window I want, because alt-tab doesn't switch windows, only apps.
| ctrl+down gets me the windows from that app. Except when
| something is maximized, because then I need to remember where I
| left it if I want to switch to it.
|
| I can't shake the impression that somewhere down the line, Apple
| lost their direction and started messing things up. The crappy
| keyboards they added are pretty infamous, but they also managed
| to make the desktop unintuitive.
|
| Edit: also, why can't you drag and drop files anymore? This used
| to just work.
| ftio wrote:
| Protip: Cmd+tilde (~) cycles through windows in the current
| app.
|
| Coming from Windows, it can be annoying, but once you build the
| muscle memory, it can actually be quite nice to have the two
| methods separated.
| rootsudo wrote:
| With Big sur and more permissions, it's harder. I understand
| them, I appreciate them but I hate how every app has to ask my
| permission and how I have to go into the settings menu to allow
| stuff.
|
| At this point, SElinux sounds usable as a daily driver.
| 627467 wrote:
| In my experience, growing up in parts of the world and segments
| of it's population where macos has never been pervasive, a non-
| techy user that had to use my Mac laptop for casual browsing
| struggles to understand how to even start (I hide my dock).
|
| In my view, the idea that Mac has been more usable and
| democratizing (for personal computing) is not backed by either
| market data or personal anecdote.
|
| Pre-iOS, Windows was the most prevasive computing UX.
| mattl wrote:
| This is why the Guest Account feature is good. You can give
| someone a vanilla Mac OS X account to play with.
| drdec wrote:
| A few years ago I was in front of a Mac for the first time in
| twenty years trying to browse the web. I couldn't figure out
| how to scroll the window. There were no scrollbars and no mouse
| wheel. I had to get someone to show me.
|
| Once I was shown, it felt to me like I was supposed to pretend
| that the mouse has a scroll wheel and stroke the mouse where
| the scroll wheel would be. I didn't find it intuitive at all.
| rchaud wrote:
| I bought a Mac in 2014 after a lifetime of using Windows. I never
| understood why people called it easier to use than Windows. Maybe
| this sentiment is a holdover from an earlier era when people
| would mindlessly run executables and zip files attached in emails
| and AIM messages.
|
| From a UI perspective, it's 90% identical to windows. From a UX
| perspective though, something fundamental like Finder is still
| not up to the job IMO. Why is it that when I click Finder,
| nothing actually opens? I have to hit Option+N to actually
| display a Finder window.
|
| Don't even get me started on the sort options. What kind of file
| manager applies a Sort view to every single directory, instead of
| the one you actually set the Sort view to?
| derefr wrote:
| > From a UI perspective, it's 90% identical to windows.
|
| That's convergent evolution. The UIs started off very
| different. MacOS's current set of UI abstractions was mostly
| enshrined in an era when its competitor was Windows 3.1.
|
| > Why is it that when I click Finder, nothing actually opens?
|
| I was going to give a few justifications for this, but I just
| tested it, and clicking on the Finder icon in the Dock _does_
| open a new Finder window for me. (In Big Sur. This definitely
| wasn 't always the case; I'm not certain when it changed.)
|
| But those justifications, for the long period where it didn't,
| are still kind of interesting/relevant:
|
| 1. the Desktop is a Finder window. IIRC, on some versions of
| macOS, using a switcher to focus the Finder would -- if you
| don't have any open Finder windows -- focus the desktop
| (insofar as keyboard navigation goes.)
|
| 2. You can do useful things with the Finder without any windows
| open. IIRC, Apple's HIG only recommends creating a new window
| in response to a click on the app's icon (and or having a Cmd-0
| accelerator), if the app is useless without having a window
| open. But the Finder has a bunch of menu-items in the "Go" menu
| (with keyboard accelerators) to open windows showing specific
| locations, or to open dialogs for connecting to networks, etc.
| It'd be annoying if you wanted to open one of these, but
| focusing the Finder always opened a default window you had to
| get rid of first. I personally often focus the Finder and then
| press Cmd+K to mount an SMB share on my NAS, then immediately
| close the resulting window, because the point was to get it
| mounted for command-line use.
| ryanmccullagh wrote:
| And why can't you ever 'close' Finder? One can only hide it.
| robertoandred wrote:
| Why can't you close Windows Explorer?
| rchaud wrote:
| You can. explorer.exe may still be running as a process,
| but visually its presence can be eliminated from the GUI.
| robertoandred wrote:
| Which sounds just like the Finder?
| Steltek wrote:
| Except I get a new window when I click on the Explorer
| icon. So no, it's the opposite of Finder's fail-silent
| behavior.
| dabernathy89 wrote:
| When I click the Finder icon in my dock, or open it with
| Alfred, I get a new Finder window. Doesn't appear to be a
| configurable setting. Not sure what's wrong with your
| setup.
| asattarmd wrote:
| The worst: pressing Enter to rename a file in finder. Command +
| Down arrow to open it. WTF!
| tpmoney wrote:
| Command-up arrow moves up a directory level. Command-down
| arrow makes a logical choice for moving down a directory
| level, and since moving down a directory is the same as
| opening that directory, it follows command down would also
| open a file.
|
| Whether renaming as "enter" is a good shortcut or not, I
| think the navigation ones are perfectly reasonable in that if
| you learn one of them, it's opposite is easily guessed.
| [deleted]
| ninkendo wrote:
| The worst in windows: Command+Down doesn't open a folder, and
| Enter doesn't rename it. WTF!
| wraptile wrote:
| Enter _enters_ the file - shocker!
| mrweasel wrote:
| It says 'Return' on my keyboard, so "return the file",
| return from where?
|
| I've used macOS for 16 years, hitting enter/return still
| feels weird.
| [deleted]
| mthoms wrote:
| Mac user here. I've never given it much thought but
| you're right.
|
| _Return_ is a holdover from typewriters. It means
| "return the carriage to the left margin". I'm surprised
| the Mac keyboard doesn't say "Enter". It seems like a
| much more accurate word to describe what the button does.
|
| Yes, "Return" applies in the context of editing text
| (return the cursor to left margin) but not in any other
| context on a computer I can think of.
|
| I wonder why they continue to label it return and not
| enter.
|
| /end random musing
|
| edit: Downthread, someone provided a link to a
| StackOverflow page explaining how MacOS treats enter and
| return differently in some rare instances (it's program
| specific).
| zabzonk wrote:
| Windows has a Command key?
| ninkendo wrote:
| You can plug a mac keyboard into a Windows PC... I think
| you're missing the joke though.
| yesenadam wrote:
| Hehe I've been on Mac minis for nearly 10 years now,
| always with a PC-clone keyboard: "Window key" is my CMD
| key.
| [deleted]
| oceliker wrote:
| Macbooks don't have an Enter key. They have a Return key,
| which is different:
| https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/47565/return-vs-
| en...
| yesenadam wrote:
| Oh thanks, that's fascinating, I thought they were the same
| thing. Reading the answers on that page, it sounds like
| there are quite a few programs in common use (e.g. Final
| Cut Pro) that treat ENTER and RETURN differently. I have
| both keys on this PC clone keyboard plugged into a Mac
| mini, so maybe I'll be able to use the numpad's ENTER for
| keyboard shortcuts. Thank you!
| hnlmorg wrote:
| Your comment would have had more relevance 30 years ago but
| these days I think it's fine to use the terms
| interchangeably given 99.99999% of software these days use
| those keys interchangeably.
| taylodl wrote:
| I use Command+o to open a file and Command+p to print a file.
| It's also kinda handy to make a duplicate of a file using
| Command+d. Of course deleting a file is Command+Delete and
| ejecting a volume is Command+e. For consistency you'd think
| renaming a file would be Command+r but at some point in time
| (the first Mac?) they decided on expediency and made it Enter
| instead.
| dahart wrote:
| So true, this is a bizarre choice that tells the user that
| renaming a folder is more important and more frequent than
| navigating. It makes keyboard navigating in the Finder pretty
| annoying (unless you only live in column view, which feels
| very claustrophobic to me). IMO the Finder has a bunch of bad
| UX, it's like they never figured out what to do with it
| during the OSX transition, and then refused to improve it or
| do anything to it to change old behavior or take it closer to
| what any other OSes had done.
| D13Fd wrote:
| All it means is that to rename you press enter, and to open
| you press command-o. It works perfectly fine for keyboard
| navigation.
|
| After using both for a long time (Windows for 30 years (!)
| and Mac OS for 16), I actually like the Mac OS way a bit
| better. In my usage renaming is a very common operation and
| I don't have F keys on my usual keyboard (renaming in
| Windows is F2).
| dahart wrote:
| I don't disagree with your opinion, there's nothing wrong
| with liking command-o for nav.
|
| But what I mean is that Finder navigating uses an
| unintuitive key chord you have to learn, while renaming
| uses a single key, and a large and very
| common/obvious/intuitive one. This does in fact mean the
| UX is declaring which one they expect to be more common.
| I'm not saying renaming is uncommon, but for me it's
| nowhere near the usage of navigating into a folder. Are
| you saying you're renaming folders more often than
| browsing into them? (How do you get to the folder you
| want to rename?)
|
| Both Windows and Linux GUI folder browsers use the Enter
| key to navigate, and so do many other tree browser UIs
| including our web browsers. It's very common and very
| reasonable to expect Enter to navigate to the thing
| you've selected. This expectation and ecosystem of
| navigating this way means that Mac's Finder stands out as
| different and unintuitive, even within a Mac-only set of
| applications. I love my Mac, and I've also used both
| Windows and Mac since they first existed ... both for 35
| years. But today's Finder is definitely weird and
| anachronistic compared nearly all other modern file
| browsers.
| whywhywhywhy wrote:
| This is one of my favorite things about it, really wish I
| could have the same behavior on Windows.
| geraltofrivia wrote:
| Amongst other gripes people have mentioned (and I agree with),
| here's another:
|
| cut. There does not seem to be a way to cut and paste a
| file/folder. The best I could figure out is to drag the icons,
| hold down the finger, and move the cursor to the desired folder
| on the sidebar (or another window) and release the finger. This
| is either extremely difficult to pull of, or I am less
| dexterous than I think I am.
|
| Why not have cut as an option in the drop down menu? I really
| can't figure this one out. What UX mantra suggests this.
|
| Also, dragging files around is also a difficult feat to
| overcome. You either press down too hard (end up opening all
| selected files in their target applications -- RIP ram, let's
| restart the computer), or too gently and nothing happens.
| lawkwok wrote:
| Try Command + Option + V to paste and delete the source file
| (cut and paste).
|
| I remember this command was I implemented a few years back
| and I think it was to reduce chances of unpasted files from
| disappearing or something.
|
| In fact, opening any menu and pressing option reveals many
| secondary functions.
| samatman wrote:
| Drag and drop has steadily gotten harder to use over the
| years. I have no explanation for it, it's maddening.
|
| Not cutting files is deliberate, I think. What should the OS
| do if you cut files, and then don't paste them and cut
| something else? Put them back, put them in the Trash?
|
| A sibling comment pointed out that there's a magic
| incantation for "paste and delete", but clearly the Mac way
| to do it is drag and drop.
|
| Which used to be dead easy, and now I'm lucky if I get it the
| first time.
| gowld wrote:
| "Cutting" is a no good, terrible idea, but a good idea
| would be to allow a "Grab", and then let the user navigate
| elsewhere and "Move grabbed item here." Mac doesn't have
| that because it breaks the visual/spatial metaphor.
|
| Of course, "Copy" does too, yet Mac allows that...
| samatman wrote:
| I don't think that's why it doesn't exist, it's more that
| copy/cut/paste makes sense for most things, and the cut
| part is bad for files, so 'grab' wouldn't be very
| reusable elsewhere in the OS. Or if we're being real,
| they just don't have it because changing Finder is a very
| low priority for the company.
|
| But I agree with you that it would be a good feature for
| Finder! Finder is missing a lot of useful stuff, it
| basically hasn't changed, and when it has it isn't for
| the better.
|
| While we're dreaming, a great implementation of "grab"
| would be to have a differently-shaped window with just a
| doc handle and a close button on it, and the grabbed
| documents jump from the Finder window to the grab window.
| Then you can drag and drop the doc handle, or hit the
| "move grabbed items" hotkey, and the grabbed
| files/folders would jump into the new location. Or if you
| close the grab window they all jump back to where they
| were.
|
| Grab window floats on top of everything else in Finder,
| so you can't lose track of it, and if you close it the
| files always go home, and you can only have one at a
| time.
| geraltofrivia wrote:
| That's a fair point. But a lot of our computer interactions
| are, now, so intuitive since they exist on other platforms,
| it just irksome if they don't exist on Mac.
|
| > What should the OS do if you cut files, and then don't
| paste them and cut something else?
|
| Windows, and common linux file managers leave the files in
| place in this scenario. Its not the most intuitive thing,
| but people (i think) understand this is what'll happen if
| you cut something and then cut something again.
|
| > magic incantation
|
| About that. I love how a combination of control, alt,
| command, function and tab keys can make you into a keyboard
| ninja but I also can't help but feel that it's a bit much.
| For the first few months after getting a mac, about 20-30%
| of my search engine queries were about these keyboard
| shortcuts. It's a steep slope. And the combinations often
| do something very fundamental that you often use tens of
| time a day. For instance, I was today years old when I
| realize that 'command+down' opens a file.
| philsnow wrote:
| the only possible thing I can think of that can explain this
| is that if you cut and then forget about the item, it just
| disappears eventually (reboot, copy other item, whatever).
|
| that's one thing when it's copied text from some web page,
| but quite another when it's a file or folder.
| geraltofrivia wrote:
| I'm not sure if other OS's do this. If you cut something on
| Windows Explorer (files or folders), they get somewhat
| greyed out. If you then paste them somewhere, they move. If
| you don't -- as in, you restart the computer, cut something
| else etc, the files stop being greyed out and return to
| their normal color. It's intuitive, and you don't lose your
| files.
| dsego wrote:
| Afaik, no OSs would delete the file once it's marked as
| cut. But there is a chance you accidentally move a file,
| which is worse than accidentally copying/duplicating one.
| In the latter case you just delete it but for moving you
| now need to figure out the original location.
| karaterobot wrote:
| This was one of my big gripes about MacOS when I had to use
| it for work. Evidently what you need to do is copy the file,
| then hold down OPT (along with CMD-V) when you paste it.
| You'll hear a sound effect that tells you it worked.
|
| If you right click to open the context menu, and press OPT,
| you'll even see the "paste item" option turn into "move
| item".
|
| It's 100% the wrong way to do it. Maddeningly wrong. In a
| world where CTRL-X hadn't existed for decades, and Apple's
| way of doing it was the norm, if someone came along and
| "invented" CTRL-X for the cut command, it would be
| universally recognized as an improvement.
| geraltofrivia wrote:
| This seems to be one of those things that Apple leans hard
| towards, just because. a la the lightening port.
| EamonnMR wrote:
| Trying to find a file you know the name of in finder is
| absolute murder. I often find myself resorting to `ls | grep`
| then `open` in the terminal.
| kec wrote:
| There's a preference to switch the search field from "the
| entire universe" to "this folder".
| throwaddzuzxd wrote:
| The Finder is atrocious. It's the worst default macOS app and
| probably the worst program _period_ I 've ever used. It's been
| so dumbed down that it's basically unusable for anyone slightly
| experienced.
|
| - There's no way to create an empty file
|
| - There's no easy way to cut a file/folder (Cmd-x doesn't work)
|
| - There's no (?) way to keep everything consistently sorted and
| aligned
|
| - ~~Tags are useless and just take up space for nothing~~ This
| one is entirely subjective. I retract it.
|
| - No "parent folder"...
|
| There's some great features in Finder but it sucks at so many
| things it's just frustrating to use. Windows Explorer is
| infinitely better. It has less cool features (no tabs for
| instance) but is so much better to actually use.
|
| I get that some features are hidden to avoid confusing non
| savvy users, but preventing experimented users to do basic
| stuff is criminal.
| lloeki wrote:
| > - There's no easy way to cut a file/folder (Cmd-x doesn't
| work)
|
| CMD+C then CMD+ALT+V
|
| I think of it not as copy-paste vs cut-paste but mark-copy vs
| mark-move.
|
| It makes it consistent with drag and drop where alt is the
| modifier for copy vs move (the default depending on whether
| it's same disk vs another one)
| mlindner wrote:
| There's no Alt key on a Mac.
| Tagbert wrote:
| Option/Alt
| dsego wrote:
| > There's no easy way to cut a file/folder (Cmd-x doesn't
| work)
|
| You don't need cut for files, you either want to duplicate
| the file or move it. For moving you copy it (cmd-c) and then
| move with cmd-opt-v.
|
| Cut doesn't really make sense for files. With text you cut
| out the text into a clipboard. Where does the file go when
| you cut it? Nowhere. There is no place where you can see that
| you had already cut a file but it's waiting for you to make a
| mistake and move it somewhere by accident.
|
| Mac has a better duplicate/move UX paradigm and more
| appropriate for files & folders.
| throwaddzuzxd wrote:
| How does one discover Cmd-Opt-V?
|
| Even with a right click after copying a file, there's no
| "Move" option. Your explanation makes sense but doesn't
| really seem supported with Finder's UX since the "Move"
| terminology doesn't exist anywhere
| dsego wrote:
| Usually the option key uncovers more available options in
| context menus.
|
| > How does one discover Cmd-Opt-V?
|
| Keyboard shortcuts are not usually meant to be
| "discovered" (how do you discover ctrl+x?). You can learn
| and memorize them. Although, there is a common theme with
| the option/alt modifier on the mac.
| amatecha wrote:
| They are indeed meant to be discovered -- they are
| usually listed on menu items. You can hold down modifier
| keys like Option, Command, Ctrl and Shift to see how the
| menu item's text actually changes to reflect the action
| that will be taken if you press the respective key
| command. Very discoverable. I've never seen any other OS
| that does this (not that I look for it specifically).
| Also note when ellipses at the end of a menu item
| disappears when you are holding Option or whatever --
| this means the action will be taken immediately, instead
| of asking the user to confirm (quick example is on "Empty
| Trash" in the Finder menu).
| jlund-molfese wrote:
| Microsoft Word is an example of software which allows
| keyboard shortcut discovery pretty well [1]
|
| [1] https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/keyboard-
| shortcuts...
| dsego wrote:
| > Press the Alt key to display the ribbon shortcuts
|
| Seems pretty similar to apple, you have to know that
| pressing Alt shows additional information.
| aoeusnth1 wrote:
| It's another UX paradigm I have to remember (and usually
| don't) instead of using the standard one which is second
| nature to me.
| dsego wrote:
| Nobody is forcing you to use macs. Doesn't make the mac
| any less intuitive if it doesn't follow what alternative
| operating systems are doing.
| tsimionescu wrote:
| It does make it less intuitive if it is hiding common
| interactions behind keyboard shortcuts (cmd+up instead of
| an Up button) or if it is inconsistent with common
| paradigms (different shortcuts for copy vs cut + single
| shortcut to paste is universal outside finder, which uses
| an entirely different paradigm).
| arm wrote:
| > _It does make it less intuitive if it is hiding common
| interactions behind keyboard shortcuts (cmd+up instead of
| an Up button)_
|
| Navigating to the parent folder isn't exclusive to a
| keyboard shortcut ([?]|). It's also accessible from the
| menu bar ( _Go_ - _Enclosing Folder_ ).
| amatecha wrote:
| It's not hidden at all - it's actually a very easily-
| discoverable menu item under the "Go" menu.
|
| In regards to consistency, though I know this isn't
| exactly what you meant, I just booted a virtual machine
| with System 6 (released in 1988) and Command-Up was the
| same key command to open the parent folder. :)
| coldtea wrote:
| > _- There 's no way to create an empty file_
|
| Create it for what? To use to launch the app that handles it?
| Just open the respective app and save an empty or unedited
| file.
|
| > _- There 's no easy way to cut a file/folder (Cmd-x doesn't
| work)_
|
| Copy as regularly (Cmd-C), and use Option-Cmd-V to move the
| file where you want to.
|
| > _- There 's no (?) way to keep everything consistently
| sorted and aligned_
|
| Not sure what you mean.
|
| > _- Tags are useless and just take up space for nothing_
|
| They're useful if you use them. Many people do use them. What
| exactly would you do with that "space" anyway? It's not like
| they take space in your apartment. It's a UI element which
| you can use or not use.
|
| > _- No "parent folder"..._
|
| Cmd+up arrow or Go -> Enclosing Folder.
|
| Looks like all of the complains are basically "they're not
| where they was on Windows".
| throwaddzuzxd wrote:
| > Looks like all of the complains are basically "they're
| not where they was on Windows".
|
| Well... yeah kinda but not only. Windows does some things
| better, and it seems like a good idea to copy good UX
| paradigms wherever they come from. Also for some of these
| your answere is "why do you want to do this?" or "use some
| obscure keyboard magic". I want to because I want to.
| Sometimes I'm in a folder and want to create a specific
| file because it fits my current workflow. I don't always do
| it, but sometimes I need to.
|
| >Copy as regularly (Cmd-C), and use Option-Cmd-V to move
| the file where you want to.
|
| I don't care, why is it not Cmd-X? Why do they break the
| universal standard with this?
| coldtea wrote:
| > _I don 't care, why is it not Cmd-X? Why do they break
| the universal standard with this?_
|
| Because there's no "universal standard". There's mac
| (which did UI/folders/etc before Windows), Windows, and
| there's X and modern Linux desktops which came late to
| the game and (especially traditional X) didn't have any
| consistent way to do this (or even oferred it).
| bane wrote:
| You successfully managed to confirm all of the parent's
| complaints by showing that they aren't achievable in
| Finder, or don't follow a consistent convention and have to
| be done some other way.
| coldtea wrote:
| All of those are achievable in Finder, the shortcuts I
| gave work precisely in Finder, and are also available as
| toolbar buttons and/or menu options.
|
| > _or don 't follow a consistent convention and have to
| be done some other way._
|
| The follow macOS conventions, not Windows conventions.
| cdcarter wrote:
| What's wrong with command-up to go to the enclosing
| folder? As the poster stated, you don't even need to use
| the keyboard shortcut, there's a menu item.
| tsimionescu wrote:
| If I'm in a GUI app, I'm navigating with the mouse.
| Having to take my hand off the mouse to type Cmd+Up is
| not good UX for such a common command as "cd ..".
| coldtea wrote:
| I already gave one method to do it with the mouse (Go ->
| Enclosing folder). There are several other ways to
| navigate to the parent.
| Tagbert wrote:
| For GUI you right click on the folder name and go to
| parent or you double click on the parent folder name in
| the path at the bottom of the window.
| defaultname wrote:
| It might "confirm" the complaints but it also invalidates
| them. Fighting against the way something works isn't
| particularly valid, and is often ignorance (in the "don't
| know" way, not the obnoxious way). The guy helped with
| some knowledge.
|
| This goes both ways. There have been whiny posts by Mac
| users who go to Windows (or from iOS to Android) and then
| gripe and complain about everything that isn't what
| they're accustomed to. It's just as silly.
| tryonenow wrote:
| How is any of this intuitive?
| schnebbau wrote:
| So basically "you're holding it wrong".
| coldtea wrote:
| So basically "if you're expecting Windows conventions,
| you came to the wrong place".
| dsego wrote:
| Or rtfm.
| cpleppert wrote:
| >> There's no easy way to cut a file/folder (Cmd-x doesn't
| work
|
| Cmd-opt-V will move the previously copied folder/file. I find
| this behavior superior to having to decide whether to
| cut/copy a file to select it. Instead, you choose the
| operation when it is time to actually move or copy. You can
| also copy a file to multiple locations in combination with a
| move.
|
| Cmd-up moves to the parent folder.
|
| You have lots of sort and aligning options that are
| accessible in keyboard shortcuts. Column browser doesn't have
| a good windows equivalent for example. Alt or double clicking
| the bottom bar adjusts the width of all panes or auto adjusts
| the selected one. So I'm never in a situation where some file
| name is cut off even in very deep hierarchies.
| rjayatilleka wrote:
| FYI you can do cut in Mac. Do Cmd-C to copy and the Cmd-
| Option-V to cut-paste. For whatever reason, Windows has cut
| attached to selecting the file, but Mac has it attached to
| pasting the file.
| tsimionescu wrote:
| > For whatever reason, Windows has cut attached to
| selecting the file
|
| That is the universal way copy/cut&paste work, everywhere
| outside the Mac Finder.
| dsego wrote:
| Everywhere being windows and linux file managers that
| copied windows?
| hdctambien wrote:
| And "real life" cutting and pasting that the metaphor was
| based on (scrapbooking, ransom notes, etc...)
| frosted-flakes wrote:
| Even on Mac OS cut works like Windows, except in Finder.
| dsego wrote:
| On text where it makes sense.
| kevincox wrote:
| To me attaching it to source file actually makes sense. In
| either scenario paste results in the same thing at the
| destination, it is only the behaviour of the source that
| changes.
|
| (Sure, under the hood nothing different happens at the
| beginning, but semantically I think Windows makes sense
| here)
| bayindirh wrote:
| > There's no way to create an empty file
|
| This is one of the features I never miss and don't use on any
| other DE (like KDE). I just open the app, create the file and
| save. Maybe it's just habit, but I personally doesn't find it
| as a needed feature.
|
| > There's no easy way to cut a file/folder (Cmd-x doesn't
| work)
|
| Just drag it where you want while pressing CMD? I know it's
| not cut but it prevents a lot of errors I think.
|
| > There's no (?) way to keep everything consistently sorted
| and aligned
|
| It's called "Clean Up By". Available in right click menu and
| in the top menu probably. It'll always keep the order you
| choose.
|
| > Tags are useless and just take up space for nothing.
|
| On the contrary, this is something I love. I can just throw a
| bunch of files to a folder and tag them about what I'm going
| to do with them. Colors allow me to mentally sort them with
| no overhead.
|
| > No "parent folder"...
|
| Two-finger click to folder name on the finder. The path will
| be revealed as a reverse-ordered stack. Or just press back.
| It's parent folder 99% of the time.
| DocG wrote:
| > This is one of the features I never miss and don't use on
| any other DE (like KDE). I just open the app, create the
| file and save. Maybe it's just habit, but I personally
| doesn't find it as a needed feature.
|
| To give perspective, I do weekly. I work often files that I
| need to modify or create files that have no native apps
| with UI. Key files, certs, etc.
|
| Also, its way easier when working to just create file in
| already open dir than go open a program and try to navigate
| to the dir you already are. Eg local web development, I'm
| 10 dir deep somewhere obscure place.
|
| I'm on windows.
| qubitcoder wrote:
| That's right. Regarding your last point about two-finger
| clicking on the folder name to show the path, you can also
| go to "View > Show Path Bar".
|
| That will show the full path along the bottom, and you can
| move to any parent folder by double-clicking on it--which
| is, perhaps, not exactly intuitive :-).
| Nextgrid wrote:
| "Clean up by" is still a manual thing you have to do
| regularly? My downloads folder looks like a mess because
| files constantly get added/deleted from it via the Dock.
| bayindirh wrote:
| No, that's "Clean Up", which just aligns & tidies stuff a
| little. "Clean Up By" is automatic.
|
| I generally disable "Clean Up By" because I love to
| visually group my folders for some types of folders.
| e.g.: Assets there, source files here, readme and docs to
| that corner, etc.
|
| However, sometimes an orderly folder is required and I
| enable Clean Up By date for example. That folder is
| always sorted by date.
| tsimionescu wrote:
| > Just drag it where you want while pressing CMD? I know
| it's not cut but it prevents a lot of errors I think.
|
| That requires you to have both places visible on the screen
| at the same time. It's also a mouse+keyboard interaction,
| the least usbale kind of interaction.
| bayindirh wrote:
| > That requires you to have both places visible on the
| screen at the same time.
|
| You can drag a file across tabs, folders, dive in folders
| in finder, drag it across desktops and more.
|
| > It's also a mouse+keyboard interaction, the least
| usbale kind of interaction.
|
| I don't know you, but my left hand is on the keyboard all
| the time, and my thumb is on the command almost 99%
| percent of the time. It's just an instinct-like action
| for me.
|
| Also, you can use cmd+opt+v it seems. TIL that.
| vladvasiliu wrote:
| You can use "move item here" (CMD + ALT + V) after you
| copy a file.
|
| Speaking about discoverability, I've just found it a few
| minutes ago searching for "move" in the help menu.
| socialdemocrat wrote:
| No it doesn't, Mac has spring loading for exactly this
| reason. This is a feature which has existed on Mac since
| before I OS X. Learn the system properly before assuming
| it is crap or simply ask.
| dmitriid wrote:
| > It's called "Clean Up By". Available in right click menu
| and in the top menu probably.
|
| And you cannot apply it to all folders across the entire
| system. Why they still haven't fixed tis, is beyond me.
| mlindner wrote:
| You can. View menu --> Show View Options. Customize to
| how you want it, and click the "use as defaults" button.
| dmitriid wrote:
| I've seen people mention it on the internets for the past
| few years. I've never had this button on any MacOS
| version. Currently on Catalina:
| https://imgur.com/a/D9Kbob1
| bayindirh wrote:
| It's there: https://imgur.com/a/JVnaSjb
|
| Try pressing cmd+j on a finder window.
| dmitriid wrote:
| Where do you think I pressed Cmd+J?
| bayindirh wrote:
| Sorry, I misread your comment and didn't see the link. I
| thought you've said that the options just don't exist.
|
| When I checked on my El Capitan Mac (an Early 2008, non
| unibody MacBook Pro), opening my home folder in icon view
| and opening view options shows almost the exact
| screenshot I've shared on my previous comment, including
| "use as default button".
|
| Moreover, any view except tri-column view produces a view
| options menu with "use as defaults" button. It has to be
| a real folder. All My Files is a view and is subject to
| different treatment. It may be the same with tri-column
| view because parent-sibling is blurred with multi-level
| view.
| dmitriid wrote:
| OMG :facepalm: I can't even begin to imagine who coded
| this, and why?!
|
| Basically:
|
| If you open a folder from a "shortcut" from the sidebar,
| and press Cmd+J, you get the barren options from the
| screenshot: https://imgur.com/3meteoB. _And it doesn 't
| matter if you keep clicking on other folders_
|
| Since I always use just a few folders linked from the
| sidebar, that's what I would always get.
|
| To get to the "actual finder window", you have to select
| a folder, and press Cmd + Down to "open it". Visually,
| nothing changes. But the View Options do:
| https://imgur.com/EJuqWDC
|
| It still doesn't have the "set as default", but, at the
| very least, it now looks more like your screenshot.
|
| I'm literally at a loss for words.
|
| Edit: more over, if you Cmd+Tab back, and your current
| folder is a subfolder of an item in the sidebar, the
| Cmd-J panel resets back to its barren view. Why?!!
| qubitcoder wrote:
| Interesting. I never noticed that because I've always
| used List or Icons as the default view in Finder
| (Command+1 and Command+2).
|
| Personally, I'd recommend just not using the Column view.
| It seems pretty janky compared to the other options.
|
| For what it's worth, Command+[ and Command+] will move
| back/forward between folders, just like Safari and
| elsewhere.
|
| Holding down Shift with those commands will move between
| tabs in Finder.
| mlindner wrote:
| I don't even understand how you got to that "barren
| view". I've never seen that in my life.
|
| Edit: I guess that "barren view" only happens when
| viewing things as "columns" mode. I just figured out how
| to make it look like yours. I always use list mode (as I
| often want to see/sort by date modified time or file type
| and I want to see file sizes). Columns view seems like a
| waste of screen real estate.
|
| It has nothing to do with the sidebar. In column view it
| doesn't know what folder you're viewing so there's no
| display settings it can set because that's a per-folder
| option.
|
| Edit2: I see your "less barren" options now, but it's
| still missing several options. And you don't need to do
| "Cmd+down", you can just double click a folder. This
| presumably forces it into understanding you're talking
| about a specific folder so it can display additional
| options.
|
| Also it doesn't even appear to work, those extra options
| showing up is apparently a bug as none of the options
| change anything.
| volta83 wrote:
| > No "parent folder"...
|
| or CMD+UP
| [deleted]
| ricketycricket wrote:
| Can't make any excuses for Finder. I always reccomend
| Forklift for more advanced users. Dual-pane, midnight
| commander shortcuts, multi-rename, SFTP/S3 support, etc.
| https://binarynights.com
| S_A_P wrote:
| - There's no way to create an empty file Fair - There's no
| easy way to cut a file/folder (Cmd-x doesn't work) If the
| intent is to paste/move then hold option cmd v(or in the
| context menu hold option) if you just want to cut it to
| remove it then that is a delete. Not necessarily better or
| worse imo just different
|
| - There's no (?) way to keep everything consistently sorted
| and aligned Need more info here, but I dont notice a problem
| with sorting by name type modified or any other column header
| just like windows explorer?
| taylodl wrote:
| > _There 's no way to create an empty file"_
|
| Depends on what you mean by _easy_. There 's 2 (two) things
| you need to do to make this easier:
|
| 1. Enable _New Terminal Tab at Folder_ service in Finder
| (goto Finder /Services/Services Preferences.../Files and
| Folders).
|
| 2. Make sure the _Path Bar_ is visible in Finder (it 's on
| the View Menu)
|
| Now right-click the path in the Path Bar where you want to
| create the folder, select and click the _New Terminal Tab at
| Folder_ and then touch whatever empty file you want created.
| Close the terminal window /tab.
|
| Done!
|
| I rarely need to create a new, empty file - but when I do
| this is how I do it!
| robertoandred wrote:
| What on earth is an "empty" file?
|
| And yes you can cut. Cmd-C, Cmd-Opt-V.
|
| And yes, you can sort and align. Just go to the View menu.
|
| And yes, there's a way to go the parent folder. SEVERAL:
|
| - Go -> Enclosing Folder
|
| - Cmd-Up
|
| - Right click on the window title and choose any enclosing
| folder from the tree
|
| - Show the Path Bar and double click any enclosing folder
| from the tree
|
| I don't think you've ever actually used a Mac.
| throwaddzuzxd wrote:
| > I don't think you've ever actually used a Mac.
|
| For the last 2 years I've used a Mac professionally and
| personally. I switched from Windows because lots of things
| are better. Finder is not one of them. And your answers
| should give you a hint why it sucks.
|
| An empty file is a file that is empty, with the name and
| extension I chose on the moment I need it.
|
| >And yes you can cut. Cmd-C, Cmd-Opt-V.
|
| With the wrong keyboard shortcut, the correct one
| universally being Cmd-X.
|
| >And yes, there's a way to go the parent folder. SEVERAL: >
| >- Go -> Enclosing Folder > >- Cmd-Up > >- Right click on
| the window title and choose any enclosing folder from the
| tree > >- Show the Path Bar and double click any enclosing
| folder from the tree
|
| Several ways, none being the correct one. Nice. I know
| Apple likes hard to discover shortcuts but this is
| ridiculous.
| bayindirh wrote:
| > With the wrong keyboard shortcut, the correct one
| universally being Cmd-X.
|
| I think there's no right or wrongs in keyboard shortcuts,
| but there are traditions. Both Windows and macOS has
| their distinct histories and traditions with inspirations
| from each other. I think it's equally wrong to point a
| finger to a Windows machine and shout "Why you don't have
| a command key, you inferior OS-Wannabe?"
|
| Some machines work different from each other. Sun and
| other Unixen had super, hyper and meta layers on their
| keyboards with hundreds or more shortcuts. They weren't
| wrong either, just different, and IMHO cool.
|
| > Several ways, none being the correct one...
|
| Again, if we're going to throw stones, I can name a lot
| of shortcomings in Windows from file names to other
| small/backward stuff, but it'd be equally wrong. They are
| just different systems and have different choices.
|
| > I know Apple likes hard to discover shortcuts but this
| is ridiculous.
|
| Just open the help menu of an app and write to command
| you want to find. It'll show it on the menu. Pressing
| enter will directly run that action.
| throwaddzuzxd wrote:
| >I think it's equally wrong to point a finger to a
| Windows machine and shout "Why you don't have a command
| key"
|
| Well actually I think the control/option/command paradigm
| makes more sense than ctrl/alt/super, so yeah, I'd love
| this being copied by Microsoft. It's harder than just
| supporting Cmd-X in the Finder though. Adding Cmd-X to
| Finder is just a net gain, it doesn't even require
| deprecating or breaking anything. It just brings a
| standard to an app that should support it.
| rsynnott wrote:
| > With the wrong keyboard shortcut, the correct one
| universally being Cmd-X.
|
| I think no matter what you do here, you have a problem.
| When you press ctrl-x on a file in Windows explorer;
| you're not really cutting it; nothing happens til you
| paste! (Unlike using cut anywhere else).
|
| Both Windows and MacOS end up with a bit of a strained
| metaphor here; I don't think it's at all obvious which
| way is _correct_.
| tsimionescu wrote:
| That's not true at all! The moment you cut a file on
| windows it is marked as hidden, which makes it disappear
| with default settings. It's treu that unless you paste it
| it will remain there in practice, but the UX gets it
| right.
|
| Furthermore, you can cut once and paste to several
| places, with predictable semantics identical to every
| other implementation of cut+paste (though performance of
| the first paste will be different from subsequent ones).
|
| Edit: I was entirely wrong about the second part, which
| does undermine my point considerably.
| pseudalopex wrote:
| You were wrong about the 1st part too. Cut files don't
| change attributes and don't disappear.
| tsimionescu wrote:
| At least Explorer marks them as hidden when you cut them,
| I didn't check the file attributes.
| throwaddzuzxd wrote:
| >I don't think it's at all obvious which way is
| _correct_.
|
| From a UX perspective the answer is pretty clear.
| Copy/Cut/Paste is the winning paradigm, which empirically
| makes it the correct way.
| rsynnott wrote:
| But, again, this isn't really cut and paste at all. It's
| more like "note position, and _then_ atomically cut and
| paste". Cutting and pasting files in Windows doesn't work
| at all like cutting and pasting anything else.
|
| Someone who had never used Windows might reasonably
| expect, on finding 'cutting' a file did something, that
| if they never pasted the file would just be deleted,
| because that's how cut and past normally works.
| prewett wrote:
| In fact, I have used Windows since 3.11, and until
| reading your comment I thought that cutting without
| pasting would delete the file!
| moogleii wrote:
| Generally speaking, macOS uses option or shift to modify
| existing commands. Hence cmd-c / cmd-(opt)-v. The
| paradigm is Copy -> Move or Duplicate.
|
| In Windows, it's Copy or Cut -> Paste. I don't mind this
| change from Windows. Actually, I slightly prefer the Mac
| version, because I can change my mind on what operation I
| want to do. Windows front loads the choice, and I have to
| do it again if I decide I don't want to copy or cut
| anymore.
|
| As for folder nav/manipulation, I find Finder to make
| much greater sense, whereas Explorer was just, this makes
| sense because it's always been this way (don't get me
| wrong, Finder has its shortcomings in other areas,
| although File Preview [space bar] is pretty awesome).
|
| Finder: Generally speaking, arrows do everything.
|
| * Movement within folder: up/down arrow keys
|
| * Move out or into a directory / into a file or app AKA
| open it: cmd up/down
|
| * Expand/contract a folder: left/right arrow keys
|
| * Rename a file/folder: Enter
|
| Explorer:
|
| * Movement within a folder: up/down arrow keys
|
| * Move into a directory / open a file: Enter
|
| * Move out of a directory: alt up
|
| * Expand/contract a folder: left/right
|
| * Rename a file / folder: F2
| tsimionescu wrote:
| > In Windows, it's Copy or Cut -> Paste. I don't mind
| this change from Windows. Actually, I slightly prefer the
| Mac version, because I can change my mind on what
| operation I want to do. Windows front loads the choice,
| and I have to do it again if I decide I don't want to
| copy or cut anymore.
|
| That's not just Windows, it is the way the copy/paste
| model works absolutely everywhere outside Mac's Finder.
| And there is a clear reason why it makes sense, and why
| the Finder way is just bad UX: the decision about what
| happens in location X should always be done when you are
| in location X.
|
| So, if you navigate into a folder and select a file that
| you want somewhere else, you are currently in the best
| position to decide whether you want the file to stay here
| as well (copy) or no (cut). Then, you can go somewhere
| else and just add the file in that location (paste).
| Furthermore, on Windows you can paste the file to several
| places, with predictable semantics: the file will be
| copied to each of those places (though performance of
| this operation may be suprising).
|
| I can't even begin to imagine on Mac if you copy a file
| the Cmd+opt+v it to multiple places. Does it move it
| around, deleting it from the previous place where you
| pressed cmd-opt-v???
|
| Edit: I was entirely wrong about the part about copying
| to multiple places, which does undermine my point
| considerably.
| moogleii wrote:
| > That's not just Windows, it is the way the copy/paste
| model works absolutely everywhere outside Mac's Finder.
| And there is a clear reason why it makes sense, and why
| the Finder way is just bad UX: the decision about what
| happens in location X should always be done when you are
| in location X.
|
| Hmm, the first part isn't convincing. To me that sounds
| like "everyone else is doing it" and not much different
| than arguing between left side vs right side driving,
| when there could be a third way, like teleportation. Not
| saying Finder is quite that much of a shift, but Finder's
| method does have semantical differences, and not just
| "hey we're cmd+n/m for cut/copy".
|
| As for the second part, I think that's an intriguing
| argument, but "bad UX" seems like a stretch. If it were
| truly always decided in location X, would you have to
| return to location X to cancel your copy/cut? No, because
| that would be far too strict. It also depends on what
| your mental model is of what has been decided at location
| X.
|
| On macOS: I have decided I want to manipulate the data in
| this file at location X. I can decide to copy or move it
| later at location Y.
|
| On Windows: I have decided I want to cut XOR copy this
| file at location X. I can decide location Y later.
|
| I personally like the ability to chain my decisions
| after. Based on your edit, I guess you've already
| discovered, but yes on macOS, you can issue a copy
| command once, then duplicate it and/or move it as many
| times as you want, to multiple places, even if you choose
| a move command first. Only location X's copy is altered
| if doing a move.
|
| I'm not even sure if that would be possible on Windows
| without going back and forth between location X and Y to
| switch between copy and cut (my wintel machine is down at
| the moment).
| com2kid wrote:
| > * Move out or into a directory / into a file or app AKA
| open it: cmd up/down
|
| 3 years of using a Mac now, I would _never_ have figured
| this out on my own.
|
| IMHO stupid to put the most common operation on a file
| behind a meta key.
|
| The ratio of how often I rename a file (rarely) vs use a
| file (often) doesn't come out in favor of this choice.
|
| That said I realize the decision was probably made long
| long ago and now Apple is just stuck with it.
|
| Still though.
|
| Maybe after another few years I'll figure out the hot key
| to change between the side pane and the main file list.
|
| (yes I could just look it up, but I do most of my work in
| terminal and I try to avoid Finder as much as I can, I
| _really_ dislike using it)
| robertoandred wrote:
| Cmd-X would be inconsistent with every other move/copy
| action on the Mac. Option is the modifier that switches
| between them.
|
| And what is the "correct" way to go up a folder? What
| would be easier or more discoverable than Go -> Enclosing
| Folder?
| tsimionescu wrote:
| A button? Even Unix considers that accessing the parent
| dir is a fundamental operation that deserves a dedicated
| file in the API (..) .
| robertoandred wrote:
| File in the API?
| mcv wrote:
| It's not that Windows Explorer is much better, though. I hate
| how it prefers to display everything as icons instead of
| details. How it hides files and directories, doesn't show
| extensions, etc. But there's one thing it gets right: it
| shows you where you are, and you can edit that to go
| anywhere.
|
| Finder can do that too, but it doesn't show you it can do
| that. You have to know. I recently got a Macbook from work,
| partially because a Mac-fan coworker had been bugging me to
| switch from Windows to Mac. At some point I was showing
| something and typed a path straight into Finder, which blew
| his mind! He'd been using Macs for ages, and he just wasn't
| aware that Finder could do that. He learned something useful
| and new, but it's also quite telling that even some
| experienced Mac users aren't aware of the existence of such a
| vital feature.
| throwaddzuzxd wrote:
| >How it hides files and directories, doesn't show
| extensions, etc.
|
| Finder does that too. I didn't list it because it can be
| configured, which is IMO a sensible default for standard
| users.
|
| >But there's one thing it gets right: it shows you where
| you are, and you can edit that to go anywhere.
|
| YES! Finder allows to display a breadcrumb at the bottom,
| but the simplest way to go anywhere is Cmd+Shift+G. It
| sucks as a shortcut, and even then it's inferior to
| Explorer.
| vmladenov wrote:
| If you right click on your pwd in Finder (top middle) you
| can see and jump to any point up to root.
| qubitcoder wrote:
| You can also drag and drop files/folders from Finder into a
| Terminal/iTerm window. That'll expand to the full path in
| the terminal.
|
| For example, dragging the Documents folder into a terminal
| pane becomes: /Users/<username>/Documents
| rashil2000 wrote:
| > I hate how it prefers to display everything as icons
| instead of details.
|
| It's actually the opposite. The view for each folder is
| dependent on what's inside, and if Explorer is unable to
| decide, it defaults to Details view.
| frosted-flakes wrote:
| And even then it's easy to change the defaults for each
| media type (documents, music, photos, etc.).
| noahmasur wrote:
| @coldtea already pointed out some tips, but some others to
| note:
|
| > - There's no (?) way to keep everything consistently sorted
| and aligned
|
| Press CMD-J to open up the visual option, you can auto group
| and sort, snap to grid (unsorted), choose a default view.
|
| > - No "parent folder"...
|
| You can either press CMD-UpArrow or just right click on the
| title bar to see all the folders above it.
|
| > It has less cool features (no tabs for instance) but is so
| much better to actually use.
|
| Windows Explorer is also missing column view, which is a much
| faster way to navigate the file system completely with the
| keyboard. I'm often frustrated in Windows Explorer just
| trying to move around directories.
| throwaddzuzxd wrote:
| > Press CMD-J to open up the visual option, you can auto
| group and sort, snap to grid (unsorted), choose a default
| view.
|
| I found this menu but missed the "default view" button,
| thanks!
|
| It still boggles my mind that "non aligned on the grid" is
| the default though. It's a mess.
| mthoms wrote:
| >It still boggles my mind that "non aligned on the grid"
| is the default though. It's a mess.
|
| This infuriates me _every time_. This should be the
| default for the desktop ( _maybe_ ) and absolutely no
| where else.
| mcguire wrote:
| " _Press CMD-J_ "
|
| It's amazing how far Emacs has penetrated UI design.
| Angostura wrote:
| I use tags all the time, so Im not sure why you find them
| useless. And what do you mean - no parent folder?
| socialdemocrat wrote:
| There are certainly issues with finder, but your complaints
| really just highlight that you are more experienced with the
| windows and not accustomed to Mac.
|
| One of the problems addressing some of the issues you raised
| Is that you are not really explaining what you want to do.
| All you do is complain why Mac doesn't work exactly like
| windows. Instead you should figure out what you want to do
| and explore and learn how that is accomplished on a Mac.
| amatecha wrote:
| Parent folder: command-click on the title bar of the window,
| get a menu of the entire hierarchy above the current folder.
|
| (or as others have already said, Command-UpArrow to open the
| parent folder)
| KaoruAoiShiho wrote:
| Also difficult/impossible to smart merge 2 folders, they
| always replace each other.
| anti-makrakis wrote:
| There is a console command on Mac OS called 'ditto' that
| accomplishes this.
|
| https://www.unix.com/man-page/OSX/1/ditto/
| lucideer wrote:
| I think this is a common view held by experienced computer
| users, because they don't consider which parts of their own
| usage patterns are a component of their advanced knowledge, and
| which are inherent to all users.
|
| For example: an experienced user is more likely to _notice_
| that closing a window in macOS backgrounds the app, and more
| likely to figure out how to fully exit the app process
| completely (either via Cmd+Q or menu >Quit). Given that, an
| experienced user is less likely to grow accustomed to all of
| their apps being in a backgrounded state, and find Finders
| forced background state unusual/exceptional.
|
| In contrast, an inexperienced computer user will likely leave
| all apps they use open all the time (possibly not realising
| they're running) and as such grow more quickly accustomed to
| having to Option+N for everything (not just Finder).
|
| There's a lot of such examples in macOS.
| liprais wrote:
| It is obvious you are used to windows.
| lucideer wrote:
| I'm a Mac user.
|
| I'm re-reading my own comment as both replies to it seem to
| have taken the opposite point that I intended, but I can't
| see where I said the macOS behaviour is bad. I personally
| like it (though I wasn't saying that either).
|
| My only point was that it being less intuitive for more
| techy users doesn't mean it's not generally very intuitive
| for the majority.
| gowld wrote:
| > an inexperienced computer user will likely leave all apps
| they use open all the time
|
| There are two kinds of novice users:
|
| * Leave all apps and windows open forever * Close everything
| as soon as context switches, avoiding with multitasking.
|
| You can also blend the two, but closing all windows you
| leave, but leave open forever when the system forces a
| switch.
|
| > grow more quickly accustomed to having to Option+N
|
| Novice users don't know what Option+N is. The Mac was always
| designed to be used without hotkeys.
| lucideer wrote:
| > _You can also blend the two, but closing all windows you
| leave, but leave open forever when the system forces a
| switch._
|
| This was my point. I don't think "Leave all windows open
| forever" is specifically a type of novice user: I've met
| expert users who do this. But I was rather focused on the
| "Leave all _macOS apps_ open forever " not because they're
| content with apps being open, but simply because it's non-
| obvious that the apps are running.
|
| e.g. my mother is a "close everything" user: she even
| manually logs out of all online sessions _immediately_
| whenever she 's finished with that tab (often entering
| credentials again many times in a browsing session if she
| needs to return to a site). She really can't stand having
| multiple things active simultaneously. She leaves all apps
| running (windowlessly) all the time on macOS. She would not
| be happy if I told her they were still running in the
| background.
| allenu wrote:
| I think you mean "experienced Windows user using macOS". What
| you describe are consistent design choices on the Mac. If you
| flipped things around and only knew Macs and went to Windows,
| you might be surprised that closing a window there exits an
| app! There's no reason one behavior is more correct than the
| other.
| lucideer wrote:
| I didn't imply otherwise? Did you mean to reply to the gp
| comment?
|
| I'd say both behaviours could be equally surprising to any
| user, regardless of their previous OS biases but either way
| that's not really related to the point I was making.
|
| I was just saying that an inexperienced user will notice
| technical details less (e.g. the ramifications of processes
| continuing to run in the background without windows, the
| dock status indicators showing they're still open, the fact
| they show up in the app switcher, etc.) and as such won't
| be inclined to "take control" of that default behaviour in
| a way that an experienced user might, due to their
| heightened awareness of it.
| allenu wrote:
| Ah, my mistake. I misread your comment since you
| mentioned generally "experienced users" and then
| mentioned specific macOS details that might be confusing
| for experienced Windows users. I see now what you meant.
| jbverschoor wrote:
| That's only by convention. Both OSes have an application
| with 0-x windows. macOS is just more transparent
| allenu wrote:
| How do Windows app with zero windows work? The reason
| it's doable on macOS is because the menu bar is always
| there.
| Kwpolska wrote:
| They live in the tray, aka notification area.
| samatman wrote:
| That's not the same thing though.
|
| macOS has those also, programs can live on the menu bar.
|
| But in macOS, closing the last window basically never
| exits the program. Even for a program like Element, which
| is just an Electron view, closing the window doesn't quit
| the program, even though what's left over is useless:
| there's no way to relaunch the Electron pane except to
| quit and start it again.
|
| This is just how macOS works: if you want to quit, you
| type Cmd-Q, if you want to close windows, red button or
| Cmd-W, and closing windows won't quit your program.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > But in macOS, closing the last window basically never
| exits the program
|
| There's plenty (an increasing number, IME) of Windows
| apps that work that way, but mostly if an app exists to
| facilitate some kind of user interaction via a UI and
| there's no worries open there's no reason for it to be
| open, so no windows = closed app is a fairly same
| convention.
|
| > Even for a program like Element, which is just an
| Electron view, closing the window doesn't quit the
| program, even though what's left over is useless:
|
| I think that last part pretty well illustrates why
| "closing all windows is not closing the app", while it
| make sense in many cases, is not a great model to be
| applied inflexibly.
| samatman wrote:
| Eh, I don't entirely agree.
|
| I mentioned that Element is just an Electron view because
| it doesn't behave like a native Mac app. The correct
| thing to do is to offer a menu item which would bring the
| view back.
|
| VLC is a good example of an app which works correctly in
| this way. There's only the one window, which shows either
| the playlist or the video. If you close it, VLC stays
| open, and there's a menu item which will bring it back.
|
| Of course VLC can also open files, so Cmd-O is useful
| here, and Element doesn't happen to support more than one
| window... because it's a browser view dressed as a Mac
| app. If it were native, it would be a no-brainer to
| support multiple windows, each with a given user account.
|
| So yes, there are some edge cases where an application
| offers exactly one window, and there's no reason to close
| that window instead of closing the app. But the Mac-
| native thing to do is to offer a menu item to bring that
| window back, instead of breaking consistency by having
| that program just disappear on you when you close the
| window.
| allenu wrote:
| There is one example of really bad app behavior when the
| last window is closed and it's one that Apple makes
| themselves: QuickTime Player.
|
| If you open up QuickTime Player and then play back a
| video, then close the video, as soon as you background
| the app, it auto-quits itself. I wonder if they made it
| behave this way at some point to get around a memory
| leak. It's such an unexpected thing and it infuriates me
| each time I encounter it.
| cmiller1 wrote:
| Just tested and QuickTime Player stayed open, not sure
| I've ever seen this happen.
| allenu wrote:
| Did you open and play back a video first? If you just
| open QuickTime Player and don't interact with it, it does
| stay open if you switch apps. If you open a video, then
| close it, the app closes if you switch to a different
| app. I just tried it again and that's how it behaved.
| (I'm running Catalina still, so they may have fixed it in
| Big Sur.)
| cmiller1 wrote:
| Yup. Is this a recent change? I still need to use some 32
| bit programs for work so I'm on macos 10.14.6 quicktime
| player 10.5
| allenu wrote:
| No idea. I've seen it behave this way for at least the
| past year. I just tried it on a different Mac and it
| behaves similarly, except this other Mac causes QT to
| open up the File Open dialog immediately on launch.
| (Version 10.5 of QuickTime player for me too. macOS
| 10.15.7 though.)
| jdlyga wrote:
| I've noticed a lot of convergence these days. There aren't a
| lot of differences between iOS and Android, Mac OS and Windows,
| PS5 and Xbox.
|
| I used Mac OS 7 and 8 extensively back in the day, and despite
| some UI similarities it was a totally different experience from
| Windows machines. The computers had totally different ports
| (parallel and ps/2 vs proprietary mac connectors), and a
| different set of software (Clarisworks vs Word Perfect). There
| were even developers who made games just for Macs like Ambrosia
| Software.
|
| Nowadays, you can basically use the same software (Chrome,
| Slack, VSCode, Steam) on Windows, Mac, or Linux. And can share
| a USB-C hub between a Macbook and a Dell.
| carabiner wrote:
| I mean, you're biased by an entire lifetime of using Windows.
| So you'll likely find whatever you're used to "easier to use" -
| using a GUI vs a CLI, typing in QWERTY, being righthanded,
| speaking English, driving on the righthand side of the road,
| and so on.
| ghaff wrote:
| The Finder isn't great. You might take a look at Pathfinder.
| Mauricebranagh wrote:
| Yeh when I switched for work, I though this is in some ways
| worse than filemanger in windows 3.1 !
| city41 wrote:
| I used Macs exclusively from MacOS 7 up until about 3 years
| ago. And I will always stand by Macs were easier to use, more
| consistent and more intuitive before OSX. Yes, the OS was
| archaic architecturally and it was downright primitive in many
| ways. But the UX was far superior.
|
| Finder is bizarre in that it hasn't really changed much at all
| in 20+ years.
| throwawayboise wrote:
| That discontinuity is because OSX is decended from NEXTSTEP,
| not classic MacOS. Finder was "ported" but many of the other
| NeXT-isms remain.
| agumonkey wrote:
| Macs are strange.
|
| I agree that there's a lot of counter intuitive if not worse UI
| ideas.
|
| But it's surrounded by tons of superb tricks. Remember the live
| document preview years ago ?
|
| Also the GUI guidelines made the system visually more
| appealing.
|
| The compositor is also weird, I cannot really explain but when
| I use a Mac I don't see layers.. I don't feel like i'm clicking
| on a button, then an event is sent, then some logic occurs..
| maybe it's only subjective bias (can't be 100%) but it feels
| more direct. Maybe they tailored the graphical subsystem /
| compositor to ensure extremely low latency I can't say.. but,
| even after using countless machines and countless desktop
| environments.. the first time I used a mac I felt something
| very different. Not better .. but deeply different.
| mumblemumble wrote:
| > Maybe this sentiment is a holdover from an earlier era
|
| It's a holdover from two different earlier eras.
|
| First, you have everything up to about 1998, which covers MacOS
| Classic through Mac OS 8, and Windows up through Win98. At the
| beginning of this period, when "PC" meant MS-DOS, the usability
| difference was obviously stark. But even in GUI era of PCs,
| System 7 compared favorably with Windows 3.1, and Mac OS 8
| compared favorably with Windows 95.
|
| Then Windows 98 and Mac OS 9 came out, and I'd say that things
| at least evened up. All else being equal, OS 9's GUI was still
| simpler and more intuitive, to my taste, but all else was not
| equal. Windows 9x had memory protection and pre-emptive
| multitasking, and Mac OS Classic didn't, and there were issues
| with system extensions and stability in Mac OS that I
| personally felt were more troublesome than Windows's famous
| BSOD problem during that era. This opinion could be a product
| of my experience working tech support at the time. BSOD was
| usually fixed by cursing profusely while rebooting. System
| extension conflicts were fixed at great physical and emotional
| cost to the person doing the fixing.
|
| So I'd say Windows was generally easier to use than Macs for a
| while, until OS X eventually came into its own. It's harder to
| place a start time on this, but let's say 2002ish, with the
| release of Jaguar. And then there's been a sort of long slow
| decline as they clutter up the GUI, while at the same time
| Microsoft was putting serious work into cleaning things up. I'm
| not sure if the switch happened during the Windows 7 era or the
| Windows 10 era, but yeah, I'd definitely say I find Windows
| easier to use nowadays.
|
| Personally, the main thing keeping me on Macs nowadays is
| frankly just the touchpad, to which I seem to be addicted.
| m463 wrote:
| I find one thing very very very useful with finder.
|
| spacebar to preview.
|
| select multiple items to preview them all.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > Why is it that when I click Finder, nothing actually opens?
|
| I'm not sure what you're doing wrong here - when I click the
| Finder icon it shows me the top Finder window, or opens a new
| one if there is no window. Is this not what it does for you?
| gowld wrote:
| That's only if the app is already open. If you Quit Finder
| when no windows are open, the first click opens no windows.
|
| Arguably, it's intuitive:
|
| * If you know what you are doing, you can go to the menu bar
| or click on the icon again.
|
| * If you don't know know what you are doing, the obvious
| action is to blame yourself and click the icon again, which
| does open a window (to the Recents folder). So it's
| gaslighting a little, but it is intuitive.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > That's only if the app is already open. If you Quit
| Finder when no windows are open, the first click opens no
| windows.
|
| I'm not sure what you're talking about - you cannot quit
| Finder and the app is always open. You can only force
| restart it but it is never in a quit state for you to do
| what you're say you're doing, and if you do force-start it
| it behaves as already described.
| culturestate wrote:
| If you use an external monitor, Big Sur has a tendency to
| hide windows off the edge of the screen when it wakes.
|
| macOS will do its thing when you click the dock icon and
| bring the window to the front, but it can be hard to notice
| because only a sliver of the window will actually be visible.
| scotty79 wrote:
| Maybe it's a bug. I had plenty of those accumulating using
| mac for few months.
| bombcar wrote:
| If finder has a window anywhere clicking on the finder in
| the dock doesn't open a new finder window - it just tries
| to bring the current one forward.
|
| If you have many windows, it can be hard to notice
| (especially if you have many monitors).
| vladvasiliu wrote:
| But this is the standard behavior for pretty much all
| apps on Mac OS, so if their complaint is specifically
| about Finder and not about the general behavior, that
| sounds like a bug to me.
| [deleted]
| eatbitseveryday wrote:
| > Why is it that when I click Finder, nothing actually opens?
|
| Perhaps this was changed now? Big Sur does open a new window
| for me.
| michaelmrose wrote:
| Strictly speaking a directory doesn't have an order and you are
| just switching the UI to show folders sorted.
| dsego wrote:
| What kind of file manager doesn't have tabs? Windows explorer.
| thefz wrote:
| Finder is irritating but don't let me started on iTunes if you
| want to manage a "physical" mp3 collection...
| runjake wrote:
| 1. If you click Finder and nothing opens, it means you already
| have a Finder window open somewhere or your device is broken.
| It's dumb and I wish it just opened a Finder window. As far as
| I know, there's no way to do this without scripting.
|
| 2. Right-click on the folder name in a Finder window to see and
| go up the folder hierarchy.
|
| 3. Make sure Finder is active and go to the View menu and
| select Show Path Bar.
|
| 4. I'm not sure what you're talking about with Sort View here,
| but Windows works the same as macOS and on both platforms, you
| can have it both ways.
|
| https://support.apple.com/guide/mac-help/welcome/mac
| jbverschoor wrote:
| Cmd-n for new window
| klodolph wrote:
| First, not going to claim that macOS is "intuitive", because my
| in my experience, "intuitive" usually means very different
| things to different people.
|
| As a long-time Mac, Windows, and Linux user... I'll say that
| there are plenty of random broken things on the Mac, but there
| are also a few nice things that work very consistently on the
| Mac, but you'd never think to try them because you're used to
| them not working on Linux or Windows. So if you have been using
| Linux or Windows a long time, you will _probably_ find macOS
| frustrating, just for the reason that it is different from what
| you are used to, and not because there are fundamental flaws
| with macOS or Windows.
|
| Just an example of a couple simple things that are easy on a
| Mac, but hard on Linux/Windows: saving a file to a specific
| location. Let's say you have a Finder window open, and an
| unsaved document open in an application, and you want to save
| the open document to the folder that's open in the Finder.
|
| 1. You could go to the app and hit save, bringing up the save
| dialog, and then drag the folder (perhaps from the icon in the
| title bar) into the save dialog. This moves the save dialog to
| point to that folder.
|
| 2. You could save the file somewhere else, and drag the file
| (perhaps from the icon in the title bar) into the folder.
|
| 3. You could save the file on the desktop, and then move it
| into the desired folder.
|
| I have not really ever figured out a nice way to do this on
| Windows. I often end up having to navigate through save dialogs
| on Linux and Windows and it seems unnecessary. Windows
| certainly doesn't let you move files that are open, which is a
| frustrating restriction when you run into it.
|
| > Why is it that when I click Finder, nothing actually opens?
|
| It brings Finder forward, and opens a new window _if there are
| no Finder windows open,_ which is the same behavior as other
| Mac apps.
|
| > Don't even get me started on the sort options. What kind of
| file manager applies a Sort view to every single directory,
| instead of the one you actually set the Sort view to?
|
| Command J lets you set the view options, it's per-directory and
| includes sorting & grouping. Per-directory options don't do
| anything in column view. I'm not sure what you're doing, so I
| don't know what's missing. I switched to column view in the
| early 2000s and only occasionally switch to list view when I
| need to sort a massive folder by file sizes (which,
| unfortunately, requires command-J and checking "calculate all
| sizes", which is not something you'd know to look for).
| bsanr2 wrote:
| >You could save the file somewhere else, and drag the file
| (perhaps from the icon in the title bar) into the folder.
|
| You can do this in Windows. Save the file, open the save
| dialog again, drag the file icon to the Explorer window with
| the folder you want open. Hold shift to toggle copy/move.
| klodolph wrote:
| Don't you have to close the document first?
| TurningCanadian wrote:
| Not on Linux
| klodolph wrote:
| I was unable to reproduce your success. I just tested in
| GEdit, it failed, just as I expected.
|
| I could move the file, but this broke the association
| with the open document. I saved to ~/test.txt, then moved
| it to ~/Documents/test.txt, and saved a second time. The
| second time I saved it, it saved the file to ~/test.txt,
| which is incorrect and useless. Now I have two files, but
| no action I took as a user _should_ have created two
| files--moving a file should not create a second copy, and
| saving an open file should not have created a second
| copy, so why should moving and saving create a second
| copy?
|
| On Windows, you typically get an error message, because
| you can't move an open file. (Not all applications keep
| the file open, so this doesn't always happen.)
| Personally, I think that enforcing exclusive locks is the
| worst, most significant design flaw in the entire history
| of the Windows operating system.
|
| Only on macOS do you get the nice, expected behavior...
| it does not matter if you move a file while it is open in
| an application. When a file is open in an application,
| the open file is associated with the _file,_ not with the
| pathname. You can rename a file in the Finder or
| reorganize a bunch of files in the Finder (or do the same
| in the terminal) and it does not matter whether those
| files are open in any applications. You can reorganize
| files in the Finder, and then when you save open
| documents, they save to the _new_ location, not the old
| one. If you rename files in the Finder or rename a bunch
| of files with a script in the terminal, the windows for
| open documents you renamed will update their titles to
| match the new names.
|
| The problem here is that (opinion time) the standard
| filesystem API is a really terrible interface. What you
| want is some way to create durable references to files.
| File handles can do that, but only while your application
| is open. Paths can do it while your application is
| closed, but the reference is lost if you move the file.
| On macOS, there's a standard API which provides something
| more persistent than file handles and more durable than
| paths. I think they're called "bookmarks" now, but they
| used to be called "aliases".
| tonyedgecombe wrote:
| Those proxy icons are brilliant. I only discovered them a
| short while ago but use them all the time now. It's a shame
| they are hidden in Big Sur.
| FabHK wrote:
| I suspect the fact that they appear when you hover around
| there, ie occasionally move, could make them more
| discoverable.
| robertoandred wrote:
| 100% agreed. You really notice their absence in apps that
| lack them. cough / vscode / cough
| AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
| > You could save the file somewhere else, and drag the file
| (perhaps from the icon in the title bar) into the folder.
|
| In RiscOS, drag-n-drop saving was the norm. You were not
| presented with a dialog, just an icon you could drag wherever
| you wanted the file to go. To me, this seems like a much more
| logical way to work with the desktop folder/file metaphor.
| ubercow13 wrote:
| Unless I'm misunderstanding, 1, 2 and 3 all work the same way
| on Linux, at least in GTK and I think Qt too
| klodolph wrote:
| I think you're going to have to provide some more details,
| because I'm trying 1, 2, and 3 in GTK and I can't get ANY
| of the three options to work.
|
| 1. I have a folder open in Gnome's "Files" app. I can't
| drag it into the dialog--there's nothing draggable. I could
| go up a level to the enclosing folder, drag the child
| folder into the save folder, and then go back down a level
| to the child folder... these extra steps seem a bit
| unnecessary. So it's doable, but clunky.
|
| 2. I saved a file in GEdit somewhere else. How do I move
| it? There is nothing to drag. On macOS, there is an icon in
| the title bar of the window (called the proxy icon) that
| can be dragged where you like.
|
| 3. I saved the file in GEdit on the desktop as
| ~/Desktop/file.txt, then moved it to ~/.../.../file.txt.
| Then I made some more changes in GEdit, and saved it
| again... now I have two files! GEdit was not aware that the
| file had moved, and when I saved it, it created a second
| copy of the file, which is unexpected and wrong.
|
| If this is working for you, perhaps you could share the
| exact steps?
|
| I think one of the problems here is that on Linux, there is
| no real way to drag an _open_ object... you can only drag
| things out of containers, but you can 't drag things
| without first opening the container. For example, you can't
| drag an open folder into a save window, you have to first
| open the parent folder. You also can't drag an open
| document into an open window, you have to open the parent
| folder. There's not even a clear way to do that--on macOS,
| you can command-click the name in the title bar of the
| window and select the parent folder from the drop-down...
| not saying this is intuitive, but it does _work_ which is a
| massive step up from not working at all.
| MattRix wrote:
| In Windows I would copy the folder path from Explorer and
| paste it into the save dialog and press enter, which will
| cause the save dialog to go to that folder.
| datalus wrote:
| I started off as a Windows user, but in college I switched to I
| think OS X Tiger at the time. To me, it was a pretty impressive
| upgrade & I had a *nix terminal at my disposal. But imo macOS
| has been running on the same UX upgrade since it started
| calling itself OS X.
|
| I think this sentiment largely comes from the era when
| Microsoft Windows XP was the dominant Windows flavor and also
| the ME/Vista debacles.
| mrweasel wrote:
| I switch at around the same time and I had the exact same
| experience. You can use your Mac pretty much the same way you
| did 15 years ago. Some of the newer stuff is a little
| annoying, there's basically "to much" operating system and it
| sometimes get in the way.
|
| The article isn't wrong though, so things do seem a bit weird
| if you don't know they work. MacOS is far from perfect, it is
| however much more consistent than Windows.
| samatman wrote:
| > _Why is it that when I click Finder, nothing actually opens?_
|
| This would be an example of the 10% of the UI which isn't
| identical.
|
| One of the fundamental differences between macOS and Windows is
| the menu bar. There's only one at a time, and it belongs to the
| program which has the focus. A corollary of this is that you
| don't need a window to have a program.
|
| It's not just Finder, most macOS programs are perfectly happy
| having no window open.
|
| I've been on OS X since 2003, and it took me a second to figure
| out what you were talking about here, because if I don't see
| the window I expect to see, my eyes immediately flick to the
| upper-left corner. If I see what I expect to see, I've probably
| already typed Cmd-N or Cmd-O, depending.
|
| There's a lot to complain about with Finder; my personal peeve
| is that I want two-finger-swipe-right to go back one directory,
| like the back button in browsers. But this particular behavior
| is just macOS working the way that it does. If you close all
| open windows in Preview and quit, then start it again, it will
| do the same thing.
| robomartin wrote:
| The single menu bar design breaks down very quickly once you
| start using a large display. Evolve to multiple large
| displays and it is an absolute mess. The only option you have
| is to enable the toolbar on every screen, which starts to be
| laughable.
|
| I have used Windows setups with as many as 50 screens
| (command and control center). Having each application exist
| within its own window with all relevant menus in that window
| is, by far, a superior approach in these settings.
|
| Even with three large monitors, using a mouse to fly across
| that screen space to reach a menu is just a pain. Imagine a
| system consisting of 25 x 4 screens. It would be a nightmare.
|
| Shortcuts? Someone else said MacOS lacks discoverability.
| It's true. Tooltips are almost nowhere to be found and lots
| of applications have no shortcuts. I have watched non-expert
| users in fear of clicking a button because they have no clue
| what it does.
|
| The single menu and single mouse button idea worked well on
| an old Mac with a single 9 in screen. It works fine on
| laptops. The minute the display grows in size and multiple
| displays are used the approach breaks down very quickly.
|
| If you own a multi-monitor Mac setup (we have several) and
| have enabled the menu bar on all screens, you already
| understand how broken that concept has become. If it was not
| you would only have one menu bar with your three large
| screens.
| qubitcoder wrote:
| I'm not sure I fully understand the workflow here. I use
| three large 4k monitors with macOS, and it's
| straightforward for the most part. Then again, I basically
| never use the menu bar, since keyboard shortcuts are so
| consistent across apps. I just keep the dock on the primary
| display.
|
| The only occasional pain point I encounter is when apps
| like Zoom automatically switch to "full screen mode".
|
| There's also the option in Mission Control for "When
| switching to an application, switch to a Space with open
| windows for the application". If that feature is turned
| off, then you could, for example, have Chrome on _every_
| desktop. Then it's just a matter of Cmd+tab to Chrome, and
| Cmd+n to open a new window on whichever display/desktop has
| the current focus.
|
| For window management, I've found BetterSnapTool to be
| essential. It provides the typical window snapping from
| Windows. Better yet, you can setup keyboard shortcuts to
| quickly snap a window to the left side, right side,
| maximize, or move it to the next monitor. The shortcuts I
| use mimic Vim bindings, so it's easy to remember [1].
|
| With caps locks remapped to Control in the Keyboard
| preferences, moving and re-sizing "windows" across multiple
| displays is fast & easy.
|
| But I'm probably missing something with your particular
| use-case.
|
| [0] https://apps.apple.com/us/app/bettersnaptool/id41737558
| 0?mt=... [1] https://imgur.com/a/YUufemN
| tomtheelder wrote:
| There's nothing at all wrong with the behavior, and it's
| perfectly logical once you understand what is going on, but
| it's certainly not intuitive. It's a bit of an odd mental
| model that's (as far as I can tell) specific to OSX.
|
| I find OSX to be generally pretty logical and easy to
| understand, but certainly no more _intuitive_ than something
| like Windows. Another way of saying this: if I took someone
| who didn't know how to use a desktop OS, I wouldn't be any
| more confident sitting them down in front of a Mac.
| samatman wrote:
| I don't think desktop GUIs can or should be 'intuitive'.
|
| They should be consistent, discoverable, and customizable.
|
| I give macOS full marks for consistency, and a passing
| grade for customizable, but it's hardly discoverable! I
| read these kinds of HN posts because of all the little tips
| and tricks I find.
|
| Operating systems used to come with a thick manual, and you
| could buy an even thicker "missing manual" book at the
| local bookstore. macOS could use one of those.
| m_mueller wrote:
| I actually find MacOS applications far more discoverable
| than equivalent windows or Unix tools. That's precisely
| thanks to the consistent menu structure, which always
| includes a help menu with a search option, including both
| the help files as well as the menu itself. Having help
| show you where to find a particular option so you can
| learn it for next time is precisely what I want.
| samatman wrote:
| It's better than nothing, and yeah, probably better than
| the competition as well.
|
| But then there are core features like "a file icon on a
| document window can be dragged exactly like a file icon
| in the finder" that you can use macOS for years and never
| find. That's before they started hiding the file icons in
| Big Sur!
|
| macOS is packed with little things like that.
| nneonneo wrote:
| Or, that you can Cmd+click on the document icon or name
| in any titlebar to pull up a menu of its containing
| directories. This one is _super_ handy and has zero
| discoverability.
| szhu wrote:
| It still works in Big Sur! Just hover over the window
| title and the icon (called the "document proxy icon")
| will appear.
|
| I think it's fine that they hid it, since even before,
| the things you can do with it (dragging, cmd/ctrl-
| clicking) were already hidden.
|
| The only old functionality that is lost with Big Sur is
| that you could glance at the icon to see if there are
| unsaved changes (if so, the icon would be dimmed). But
| you can still tell by looking for the dot in the red
| close button.
| yknuri wrote:
| I had no idea one could do this!
| jcelerier wrote:
| > I don't think desktop GUIs can or should be
| 'intuitive'.
|
| why ?
| xiphias2 wrote:
| I don't find key bindings in MacOS consistent. The first
| thing I started missing from Windows is the F2 button for
| renaming things. I can do that everywhere in Windows. In
| Mac there's no keyboard shortcut for it, so probably I
| could add it in Finder, but it probably won't work in
| other file dialogs (or maybe yes).
| sbtrct wrote:
| The return key is functionally the same as F2 in Windows.
| xiphias2 wrote:
| Thanks, in Windows that starts the program, but I guess
| there's another key for that...I'll have to experiment
| more. I love my M1 Macbook Pro so much that I want to get
| used to the OS.
| vladvasiliu wrote:
| It's CMD+Down arrow.
|
| One thing that's killer for me in MacOS vs Windows,
| regarding consistency, is text fields. They always behave
| the same (except, of course, for weird apps, say ms
| office). CMD+Backspace will delete a whole word even in
| password fields or system settings, etc. This is always
| hit or miss in Windows. I know it doesn't work for
| passwords. In Windows explorer it works... sometimes. It
| works in the address bar, but not in the preferences or
| when renaming a file.
| qubitcoder wrote:
| You can use Cmd+o to open a program (and the "return" key
| to rename it).
| xiphias2 wrote:
| It sounds like these combinations wouldn't work in a file
| selector for example, but I will try them.
| Koshkin wrote:
| > _consistent, discoverable_
|
| I think that's what 'intuitive' means, practically, in
| this context.
| defaultname wrote:
| I think he quoted intuitive because that's an effectively
| meaningless claim. To someone who spent two decades in
| Windows, everything Windows-like will be "intuitive".
| That doesn't make it a universal truth.
| linuxftw wrote:
| The concepts in Windows used to translate to the physical
| world. "Buttons" and "Menus." Sure, to an alien species,
| these things are unintuitive, but no more so than a door
| knob.
|
| Of course, physical things are losing buttons. I guess
| kids will refer to things as 'tap the tappy spot' or some
| such.
| shawnz wrote:
| Right, so it's not a problem with Finder but actually the
| window manager. Why would you ever want to have a "menubar-
| only" app? It would be better if the design didn't create the
| possibility of that happening at all.
| samatman wrote:
| See I firmly disagree with this.
|
| If I have some document editor open, and I close all the
| documents, what should happen?
|
| Should it quit? Well if I wanted to quit, I would have done
| so.
|
| Should it display some blank pane? Why? To let me know it's
| still running? The menu bar does that!
|
| I say it should close that last window, and then I can open
| up another one and keep working.
|
| In other words, I want to have a "menubar-only" app every
| time I'm done with all the windows I had open, and intend
| to open more. This happens frequently enough that I'm glad
| macOS works the way it does.
| hagg3n wrote:
| Honest question:
|
| Should whether an application is running or not be a
| concern to you? Why would you ever want to actually quit
| an application?
|
| Granted, I understand that in reality the app might be
| misbehaving, hogging resources and whatnot and that the
| underlying OS isn't perfect and we should absolutely have
| control over how our hardware is utilized, but from a UX
| PoV I think the notion of a running process isn't of
| interest to me unless I am developing software.
|
| If I close a window, I just want to get it out of my way.
| I only leave things running as a workaround to the
| possible slow cold start the program may present.
| jcelerier wrote:
| > Should whether an application is running or not be a
| concern to you? Why would you ever want to actually quit
| an application?
|
| same reason why I want the parts of my house that I
| rarely go to to be tidy ?
| pseudalopex wrote:
| I want it out of the task switcher.
| shawnz wrote:
| When you are done with all the windows in your editor, do
| you open a new window by choosing File > New? You don't
| open a new window by clicking the dock icon?
|
| If you close all the tabs in a browser window, should it
| close the window or display a new tab page? Or just do
| nothing but show an empty tab bar and a blank window
| pane? That seems like the worst possible solution,
| because it always requires more clicks to do whatever you
| were intending to do. At least closing the window or
| opening a new tab will save you some clicks 50% of the
| time.
| samatman wrote:
| I hit Cmd-O or Cmd-N, depending on what I'm doing.
| Personally I barely use the dock for anything, Cmd-Space
| for Spotlight is faster, and I use Cmd-Tab to navigate
| between open programs.
|
| If I close all the tabs in a browser window, the window
| should disappear, yes. If I close _all the windows_ , the
| browser should stay open, so I can start another window
| if I want to.
|
| That's the whole point of this user affordance, there's a
| difference between closing the last window and closing
| the browser! If I want to close a whole window at once,
| that's Shift-Cmd-W, Cmd-W closes just one tab, and this
| works for any tabbed window on any native Mac app.
|
| No amount of Cmd-W will quit the application, and Cmd-Q
| will always quit the application, maybe prompting and
| maybe not. They're unrelated commands, especially since
| most applications will save your windows and that's most
| often what I want to have happen.
| [deleted]
| lloeki wrote:
| > One of the fundamental differences between macOS and
| Windows is the menu bar. There's only one at a time, and it
| belongs to the program which has the focus. A corollary of
| this is that you don't need a window to have a program.
|
| The core difference is that macOS is (originally) document-
| oriented. You could care less if an app is opened or not,
| window == document, whereas on Windows, window == program.
|
| Each progressively grew into the direction of the other (e.g
| Finder progressively losing spatial features and Explorer
| gaining them, MDI interfaces on macOS vs the win7 taskbar
| being actually more of a Dock...)
| BombNullIsland wrote:
| I moved to mac during Vista, switched back for 7, and then
| bailed after Windows 8. I'm still running 7 on my gaming/video
| editing machine.
|
| Microsoft needs to stop fucking with working UIs. Metro (or
| whatever they call it now) is a worthless eyesore full of ads
| and distracting rotating, flipping, bouncing UI elements. Get
| out of my face and let me do my work.
| wraptile wrote:
| As someone who recently switched to MacOs (not by their own
| choice) there are hundreds of little annoying, broken or
| inconsistent OS things I find.
|
| One of my favorites just happened yesterday with finder - I was
| trying to figure out how to rename a file, well the usual fx
| keys aren't doing it so the common process was to go to the
| toolbar context menu where hotkey is indicated next to the
| action's text. Rename for some reason had no hotkey indication!
| [1] so naturally I'm thinking it's somehow not bounded, google
| around for hotkey editing etc just to findout it's the least
| obvious key: return.
|
| 1 - https://i.imgur.com/LtcrBPU.png
| prewett wrote:
| I'm curious, why didn't you click on the filename after it
| has been selected? That initiates rename on both Finder and
| Explorer, as well as other applications that edit that sort
| of text. (Except not OpenOffice's spreadsheet tabs, grrr)
| moogleii wrote:
| Not showing the shortcut key for rename is definitely dumb.
| And I wouldn't be surprised if it was because of some silly
| reason like a high level designer at Apple thought it
| wouldn't match the cmd paradigm, and so would rather not show
| it (even though there are plenty of existing exceptions
| elsewhere).
|
| But I would argue F2 is less obvious. It's only obvious if
| you learned it at some point or if you were there when F2 was
| chosen. Enter is at least a normal text editing key for day
| to day typing, and it's already the bookend key to finish
| typing a new name.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > well the usual fx keys aren't doing it
|
| When you say the 'usual' function keys... do you really mean
| some other system's function keys? Why would you expect macOS
| to use the same function keys as a different system? There's
| no standards body for these things.
| wraptile wrote:
| it was just muscle memory but that's not the point.
| fao_ wrote:
| > There's no standards body for these things.
|
| Yes there is -- it's called CUA (Common User Access)
|
| "The subset of CUA implemented in Microsoft Windows or
| OSF/Motif is generally considered a de facto standard to be
| followed by any new Unix GUI environment."
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Common_User_Access
| FabHK wrote:
| The original Mac predates that, and I think it is quite
| conceivable that "Enter" to select a file name and edit
| it was in use back then.
| drewzero1 wrote:
| Yes, I can confirm that it's been that way (almost) since
| the beginning.
|
| Apparently[1] the original intent was to allow the user
| to just type and rename the file, but the enter key was
| quickly added after they noticed that the display models
| all had garbage filenames. It was an early tweak that
| stuck (much to the chagrin of those of us who also use
| other systems). Why they never added it to the context
| menu is beyond me.
|
| [1] https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macinto
| sh&stor...
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| least wrote:
| The only reason that the return key is the 'least obvious'
| key to you is because you're used to that being the 'open'
| key on other operating systems.
| hnlmorg wrote:
| On literally every other operating system. I've used dozens
| of platforms, some of them pretty obscure, some of them
| hobbyist, some of them were purpose built for hardware that
| stopped being manufactured 20, 30 or more years ago, and
| all of them supported return as a trigger in menus, be it
| graphical or text based. Finder really is the odd ball with
| regards to binding it to rename.
| Bad_CRC wrote:
| I understand the frustration and I'm with you that Finder
| is atrocious.
|
| My head-cannon about this is that for consistency within
| macos, all actions must be cmd+something, so is cmd+O for
| opening a file. In the terminal you can also use the
| "open" command which opens the file or the directory (I
| use "open ." a lot, I find faster navigating in the shell
| that in the finder).
| perryizgr8 wrote:
| > all actions must be cmd+something
|
| Which is why I always try Cmd+R for renaming a file and
| then nothing happens.
| yesenadam wrote:
| Well, it makes total sense in one way - ENTER toggles
| name editing. After you change a file name, you press
| ENTER to 'save' the new name and finish editing. That
| seems logical, I think. So why not have the same key to
| start editing the name too? In the way PLAY/STOP are
| usually the same button etc.
| rubyist5eva wrote:
| Also, you use cod+down to open a file. Just like you use
| cmd+down to enter a directory. You're going "down" into
| the directory (to view its content), and if you go "down"
| into the file it should be opened with its default
| application (to view its content). Alternatively,
| cmd+down "activates" the directory so you want the same
| shortcut to "activate" files.
| LocalPCGuy wrote:
| Because, as was mentioned, in every other context/OS,
| that is not what Enter does?
| yesenadam wrote:
| My question was rhetorical. Sorry I wasn't clearer.
| coldtea wrote:
| > _Why is it that when I click Finder, nothing actually opens?
| I have to hit Option+N to actually display a Finder window._
|
| Clicking Finder will open a new Finder window if none was
| created thus far, or bring up a minimized window.
|
| > _Don 't even get me started on the sort options. What kind of
| file manager applies a Sort view to every single directory,
| instead of the one you actually set the Sort view to?_
|
| Not sure what you mean. If I click to select a sort view, it's
| applied to the directory I'm looking at.
| rchaud wrote:
| I should have written it more clearly. It applies the sort
| view globally to all folders. What I want is the sort applied
| only to the folder I'm currently in.
| coldtea wrote:
| You can use the global sort view settings, or you can right
| click, and chose Sort to override in the folder you're in.
| Or in table view, you can click the column bar and sort
| accordingly.
| m463 wrote:
| When I click the finder icon, I get a finder window.
|
| As to ease of use...
|
| MacOS is not easier to learn - it has just as many quirks as
| windows, except in different places.
|
| However, I have found it much more consistent than any other
| desktop. The menubar is one example - always there in the same
| place, with all the File, Edit, etc menus as expected. Keys are
| consistent (mostly)
|
| consistency is the key.
| screye wrote:
| I for the love of me, can't understand how to use a macbook. I
| don't mean being productive on it. I mean: how to open
| something or how clicks work.
|
| It might simply be the fact that I've never used a mac as a
| primary device. But, clicks, navigating the explorer and
| settings menus seem to be a lot simpler on windows. It also
| seems to be almost malicious in punishing you for using
| something that isn't a 1st party application.
|
| The only other time a software has made me feel so incompetent
| is shitty TV UIs and Snapchat.
|
| I can see why it is loved by people deeply invested in the
| walled garden and programmers who get a happy marriage of Linux
| and mature consumer OS. But, I would find it hard to recommend
| a macbook to someone who didn't lie in those 2 camps.
| zwily wrote:
| I feel the same way when I'm forced to use Windows or a Linux
| desktop.
| TurningCanadian wrote:
| It's not even great for programming these days. Docker on
| Linux or even Windows is a walk in the park compared to the
| horror show of slowness
| (https://github.com/docker/roadmap/issues/7) and missing
| features that it is on Mac.
| perryizgr8 wrote:
| Docker is complicated. Try running gdb on a Mac. I gave up
| after a reboot and 15 minutes of searching and trying
| different things.
|
| Unbelievable how devs put up with this.
| kristofferR wrote:
| The way sort options works is pretty nice IMO. If you wanted to
| set sort options for a single folder you'd just right click and
| open Sort Options.
| TulliusCicero wrote:
| Also, by default Finder seems to hide directory structure from
| you. This seems to be Apple thinking it'll confuse people if
| they can see 'up' directories, but I think just as often it
| confuses people like me who are trying and failing to go up.
|
| I use all three major desktop OSes regularly now, and overall
| Windows just feels like the most user-friendly and
| straightforward, though of course it too has issues (e.g.
| various settings/control panel options being randomly split
| between new style and old style systems).
|
| Oh, and Linux seems to be by far the least stable. I have apps
| freezing the whole damn computer way more often there than the
| other two.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| Are you looking for 'Go', and 'Enclosing Folder'? Or if you
| navigated to a folder from its parent, you can click the back
| button, just like a browser, which is probably what most
| users expect. It's like navigating links.
| TheOtherHobbes wrote:
| You have to customise MacOS to show full file paths and
| hidden files. Someone at Apple decided that users couldn't be
| trusted with that super-secret information, but anyone who
| reads HN is going to find that frustrating.
|
| I go back to Windows occasionally and I still hate every
| single thing about it. The tiles, the file system, the
| telemetry, the intrusive updates that guarantee I'll have to
| wait for an undefined time before I can get some work done,
| the driver lottery (still...) And many more.
|
| MacOS is more of a workable OS with some really stupid warts.
| They should have been fixed years ago, but they probably
| won't be, ever.
|
| Finder is particularly bad, and has needed a complete
| overhaul for at least a decade.
|
| But Apple's other apps are heading in an MS-ish direction -
| which is more controlling and constraining, and less
| intuitive and transparent. It really shouldn't be as hard as
| it is to export photos from Photos, and the screen grabber
| should just allow saving to any file location instead of
| getting in the way with some random-ish defaults, one of
| which can be customised, if only you remember you need to.
|
| This all reeks of second-rate middle management - untalented
| PMs trying to justify their existence with poorly-designed
| updates while more serious issues go unaddressed.
|
| Apple are a weird company. When they're in the zone they can
| hit it out of the park, like with the M1. But - ironically -
| desktop UI design is not the model it could be. If MacOS 11
| ever happens (not holding my breath...) it would be just as
| likely to be a step backwards as forwards.
| BombNullIsland wrote:
| "Fix The Effing Finder" has been a constant refrain from
| long term users all the way back to 10.1.5, they're never
| going to do it.
| throwaddzuzxd wrote:
| > the intrusive updates that guarantee I'll have to wait
| for an undefined time before I can get some work done
|
| This is a common criticism but it's entirely false. Windows
| offers a lot more way to delay or refuse updates than
| macOS. When macOS wants to update, the best you can do is
| "Ask again tomorrow". And pray you see the popup before it
| reboots in 60 seconds.
| mthoms wrote:
| I'm confused. If I click "ask again tomorrow", it asks
| again tomorrow.
|
| But, I still haven't figured out how to delay Windows
| updates (granted I haven't looked into it seriously yet
| since I only use it for casual gaming).
|
| The point is, the default UI allows users to delay they
| update on MacOS easily, while Windows does not.
| dnh44 wrote:
| FYI the most recent version of macOS (Big Sur) is v11.3;
| but I know what you mean.
| sgarland wrote:
| The inability to easily go to $HOME in Finder is of great
| annoyance to mevwhen combined with app signing. Hashicorp
| seems to run into this most often - download a new version of
| Terraform/Packer/whatever, install to
| ~/.terraform.d/plugins/darwin_amd64, and MacOS sternly tells
| me I can't run it, with zero instructions on how to proceed.
| Manually type the path in Finder/Go, Option+Open the binary,
| then you're good to go.
|
| I understand the reasoning for protecting the end user, but
| like UAC in Windows, or Developer Mode options in Android,
| you should be able to disable these protections. If I want to
| run a binary, I want to run that binary.
| selykg wrote:
| You can actually just goto your home folder. Goto
| Finder>Preferences, then Sidebar, you'll find your home
| folder is stashed away in there but not checked. It'll just
| be your username.
|
| You can also unhide hidden dot folders as well if you wish
| but by default those are hidden. I don't have the
| instructions for that right now but a google search can
| find it for you if you want it.
| politician wrote:
| Are you saying that it's not intuitive for the end user to
| press Cmd-G, type ~, and then click OK to land in a "home"
| folder where the majority of the important configuration
| files are hidden by default?
| FabHK wrote:
| The majority of configuration files should not be edited
| directly, but changed by changing settings in the app
| preferences. So that seems consistent with the philosophy
| on the Mac - don't work with files and the file system
| directly, but let the appropriate app take care of it as
| far as possible. Same with music and photos.
| sjg007 wrote:
| Photos existing in the giant photos thing is just a mess.
| I hate it. I have to export them to do anything. I am not
| sure they even back up correctly. And this is photos.
| [deleted]
| ncallaway wrote:
| > The inability to easily go to $HOME in Finder is of great
| annoyance to me
|
| You should be able to use cmd+shift+h to always jump to the
| home directory in finder. I remember having the same real
| annoyance until I discovered the hotkey.
| andylynch wrote:
| It's also on the menu bar under Go > Home. (The menu bar
| is possibly my favourite thing about Macs. Especially
| that you can search it from the keyboard and it shows you
| where the command you want is with a nice little arrow.
| Even in Excel)
| wlesieutre wrote:
| Agreed on the defaults, if you want to improve this there are
| a few related options to be aware of:
|
| 1) Edit the toolbar and add "Path" dropdown
|
| 2) View menu -> Show path bar
|
| 3) Cmd + up/down arrows to navigate up and down the path
| hierarchy
|
| But of course, when talking about how intuitive Macs are,
| having all that hidden by default doesn't exactly make it
| easy to understand where you are in the filesystem. It feels
| a bit like the Mac side of their desire to just not _have_ a
| user visible filesystem on the iPad, which thankfully they
| 've given up on it because shooting documents back and forth
| between apps via Share buttons was terrible.
| sjg007 wrote:
| Interesting.. integrate through the filesystem vs peer to
| peer.
| wlesieutre wrote:
| But not peer to peer in any sort of automated syncing
| way. You'd end up with different versions of documents in
| different apps as you sent it from one to another.
| michaelmrose wrote:
| Linux rarely crashes. What it does do is handle low memory
| situations really badly. Simultaneously browsers have got way
| more memory hungry.
|
| I have left firefox overnight and had a tab decide it would
| like to eat all my memory.
|
| Linux does have an oom killer to deal with out of memory
| situations but it will kick in halfway to the heat death of
| the universe and you will reboot first.
|
| Oom looks just like a crash the UI is frozen however if the
| offender is killed everything actually is working.
|
| The solution is a userspace oom daemon like earlyoom that
| kicks in before you actually run entirely out of memory and
| knows not to kill things like X.
|
| Distributions ought to ship with it.
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| > handle low memory situations really badly
|
| Yeah, I wonder why this happens. I've seen LKML emails
| trying to address this problem, they even cited Firefox as
| an example:
|
| https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/8/4/15
|
| This also seems to be the norm in user space software. I've
| read a lot of source code where people simply assume malloc
| never fails. Tried to discuss this on freenode once,
| apparently nobody knows what to do in case the system is
| out of memory. Why can't it gracefully degrade?
| michaelmrose wrote:
| Arguably they could degrade more gracefully by just
| starting slightly sooner when they have some resources to
| manage but they successfully ignored the problem until it
| became someone else's problem. At this point I don't know
| that any solution would be much better than simply
| running a daemon like earlyoom in practice. I'm just
| surprised that desktop distros ship with Firefox which
| absolutely can in edge cases leak gigabytes of memory but
| no good way to deal with misbehaving applications after
| memory is exhausted.
| TacticalCoder wrote:
| > Distributions ought to ship with it.
|
| You mean install it by default? Even good old Debian stable
| ships with earlyoom (which I'm ofc using, since I saw it
| mentioned here once on HN).
| michaelmrose wrote:
| Yes I mean install and enable by default. Look at the
| experience TulliusCicero had. People are extremely going
| to reasonably assume Linux freezes all the time not
| Firefox ate all my memory and Linux doesn't have a good
| story for handling oom.
| tsimionescu wrote:
| I think a much more common problem than OOM is X itself. It
| ties programs tightly together, making it trivial for one
| badly behaving process to take down all processes with a
| GUI.
| jrockway wrote:
| I like how the OOM killer stays up to date with its list of
| the worst possible processes to kill first. Back in the
| day, it used to prioritize X, bash, and ssh. Now it extends
| that to include newer pieces of essential infrastructure
| like "kubelet".
|
| It's careful attention to detail like this that keeps Linux
| relevant for the next generation!
|
| (I'm kidding, of course. I was recently trying to reproduce
| some Node test flakiness that only happened on CI, which
| has limited resources and exposes timing sensitivity. I had
| trouble getting this to happen on my 32 core workstation,
| so I decided to run 100 copies of the tests in parallel
| which definitely reproduced the issue -- and ran the
| machine out of memory. The OOM killer kicked in, and chose
| to kill all the extra Node processes without killing my SSH
| session, which was nice of it.)
| handrous wrote:
| The filesystem is _super_ confusing to tons of users. The
| reason people put crap all over their desktops is because
| they "lose" it if they put it anywhere else, while the
| desktop always stays "where it is". I don't think anyone's
| come up with a good solution to that problem, yet (Apple's
| isn't very good, and Windows' similar moves with its defaults
| aren't any better) and we're far enough into computers being
| common that it doesn't look like a majority of users are ever
| going to get comfortable with the same abstractions and
| interfaces we're all comfortable with.
| fatnoah wrote:
| For whatever reason, I have a really hard time with the Mac
| filesystem and have resorted to either command line or
| files in docs or downloads.
| AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
| Believe it or not, the way the filesystem worked on the
| original Mac operating system was that things _did_ stay
| where you put them. Open a disk and the folders on it could
| be put anywhere in that 2D space, and each folder 's
| contents could similarly be anywhere in their virtual 2D
| space, and each disk/folder opened in its own window that
| even re-opened in exactly the same position with exactly
| the same size as when you last closed it.
| prewett wrote:
| I think if you leave Finder with the defaults (icon view)
| it still does this. I think if you change the view, say,
| to list view, Finder may apply that view to all folders
| you haven't specifically chosen a view type for. I think
| if you specifically choose a type (like icons for your a
| folder of images) it stays that way, but it's not clear
| to me exactly what happens.
| michaelmrose wrote:
| Gnome did this in 3.0 and called it spatial browsing. It
| was awful with a hierarchy 5 folders deep you ended up
| opening 5 windows.
| AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
| I don't think the cultural convention of _directories_ in
| Linux is well suited to spatial filesystem navigation.
| Still, it 'd be nice to still have the option, especially
| with AppImage doing a reasonably job of approximating the
| one-file-application paradigm of Macs.
| michaelmrose wrote:
| The normal procedure of clicking on a folder result in
| redirecting the existing file management window to the
| new directory is the only functional way to operate. The
| behavior of creating a new window per directory
| inevitably creates too many window management tasks in
| terms of constantly closing extra windows.
|
| Also what size your file manager should be is a function
| of what else you have on the screen which is inevitably
| variable so you end up resizing and moving windows to fit
| in with an arrangement that is different than last time
| you opened that directory. It's vastly easier if you want
| 2 directories shown side by side is to just use the
| traditional split view.
|
| The fact that size and position are arbitrarily chosen
| even if they are per directory means that there is no
| mental map between position and position in the
| filesystem hierarchy.
|
| Spatial browsing is a poor metaphor based on nothing that
| never made any sense whatsoever.
| [deleted]
| handrous wrote:
| That's a good point--that's probably the closest a file
| manager has come to being truly _usable_ by most folks.
|
| Relatedly, IMO iOS took a huge step backwards in UX when
| iOS7 moved away from a highly spatial interaction
| metaphor for practically the entire OS--by which I don't
| mean the skeuomorphism, exactly, but things like folders
| sliding the screen "open" when tapped, so that they had a
| sense of physical location _within_ the main screen. Or
| "slide to unlock" looking like a _physical slider_ so you
| didn 't even need to read it to know what to do. The loss
| of the security blanket that was the physical (or at
| least faux-physical) home button has hurt it, too.
| bluGill wrote:
| It was great until you had a disk shared between the
| large monitors at school and the tiny one you had at
| home. So long as all screens are the same sized and layed
| out the same it worked good. However any form of using
| two different computers and the whole thing started to
| fall apart. Throw in multiple monitors and it isn't
| possible to do this usefully.
|
| It also only worked well when you only had a few files in
| any folder. If you have 100 files that are related in one
| folder and you can't find anything without sorting it
| alphabetically. Depending on how your brain organizes
| things this might not matter.
| AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
| I think the concept may just need some slight
| modification to work in more modern cases like this.
| Namely, by making the interface zoomable.
| amelius wrote:
| A better search functionality would help.
| jbverschoor wrote:
| What do you mean? It's very good. Just have to change the
| finder pref to only search current and subfolders
| w0de0 wrote:
| And we're on Hacker News and it's a Unix system, why are
| we even talking about Finder.app for searching...? Use
| mdfind.
| dehrmann wrote:
| > The filesystem is super confusing to tons of users
|
| It's basically hidden entirely in iOS, probably for this
| reason.
| don-code wrote:
| This seems on point. The conversation at the dawn of
| personal computing would have been:
|
| > Where's file X for project A?
|
| > On the floppy disk for project A.
|
| And that more or less continued for most users through the
| 90s, but then it got confusing to the entry-level user:
|
| > Where's file X for project A?
|
| > In My Documents, under the folder "Project X".
|
| Which, I'd bet, is one of the reasons why cloud-based
| editors have taken off - the file is "in Google Docs",
| rather than in a directory hierarchy on the filesystem.
| GDocs presents me with a more or less flat view of all of
| my documents. I hate this - I have to go over to Google
| Drive to organize them - but I can understand how it'd be
| much more approachable to the average user.
| FabHK wrote:
| > trying and failing to go up
|
| Cmd-click on the folder in the Finder window title, and go up
| as far as you want?
| meowface wrote:
| This is the way. However, I only found out about this after
| years of using Macs, I think by randomly happening to
| notice that functionality one day.
|
| It's not obvious in the slightest. No affordance
| indication, no tooltip, no flashing indicator or
| walkthrough demonstration when you get a new Mac, nothing
| happens if you hover over it or click it, no real reason to
| think there'd be extra functionality in an unadorned window
| title, etc.
|
| I like the hardware and I like the advantages of a *nix OS
| for dev stuff (compared to Windows - at least pre-WSL), but
| the only thing MacOS has going for it is looking
| graphically decent and having decent performance (as far as
| I can tell). The actual UX is quite odd and arcane in many
| ways. Definitely not intuitive.
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| Correct. But that's one of those _hidden_ features that
| someone has to tell you about. Not intuitive certainly.
| LocalPCGuy wrote:
| This is the thing about Macs - people think they are
| intuitive because they have learned how to use them over X
| number of years. Including, I believe, those building the
| OS at Apple. But for a person who isn't familiar with them,
| they are absolutely not intuitive.
|
| And any time there is a complaint, the community is like
| "Oh, dummy, just do this thing that is not obvious at all,
| how could you not figure that out?"
| moogleii wrote:
| It goes both ways. I agree cmd click on the title is
| definitely less intuitive (hell, I just learned that
| now). If I were guiding a new user to macOS, I would
| instead show how to reveal the Path Bar on Finder which
| requires less memorization from the user. Not sure why
| that isn't enabled by default.
|
| That or explain the arrow-key centric keyboard
| navigation, which has fewer exceptions than Explorer.
|
| But there are plenty of shortcuts on Windows that are the
| way they are for historical reasons, not because of user-
| centric design.
| ChuckNorris89 wrote:
| _> This is the thing about Macs - people think they are
| intuitive because they have learned how to use them over
| X number of years_
|
| You can say that again. I never had to interact with a
| Mac in my life (Macs weren't popular in Eastern Europe so
| I grew up with Windows and Linux) and later in life at
| one job interview, the tech lead gave me his Macbook and
| told me to code a sorting function in JS and stepped out
| for 10 minutes. Within that time, I accidentally
| performed some swipe gesture on the trackpad which hid my
| code editor away with me unable to find it as I had no
| visible taskbar and all I had visible was a Chrome window
| so I started googling how to get my code window back.
| When the tech lead came back I apologized and told him I
| couldn't finish the task since I hid the code editor by
| accident and had to google how to use the OS.
|
| I'm biased here of course, but IMHO for someone new to
| the OS, MacOS UX discoverability is worse than Windows or
| major Linux DEs.
| AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
| > Also, by default Finder seems to hide directory structure
| from you. This seems to be Apple thinking it'll confuse
| people if they can see 'up' directories, but I think just as
| often it confuses people like me who are trying and failing
| to go up.
|
| Kind of ironic considering all the research Apple did that
| led to the spatial finder.
| amelius wrote:
| > Oh, and Linux seems to be by far the least stable. I have
| apps freezing the whole damn computer way more often there
| than the other two.
|
| How often is that? What hardware do you run it on? What
| distro do you use?
| dagw wrote:
| Not OP, but I've noticed the same with Linux over the past
| year or two. Stability has taken a distinct dive for the
| worse.
|
| Two different Ryzen APU based computers I've built running
| whatever Ubuntu happened to be the latest. Tried both KDE
| and XFCE and they freeze about 1-2 times a week. The
| computers haven't crashed and if you ssh in everything
| seems to be running fine, but mouse/keyboard/screen are
| completely frozen. One computer dual boots Windows and I
| can run Windows for a month on it without rebooting and it
| never misses a beat.
| michaelmrose wrote:
| When you ssh in is memory nearly exhausted because
| firefox or Chrome have decided to eat all your memory?
| [deleted]
| geraltofrivia wrote:
| Not OP, but I run elementary OS 5.1.7 Hera, built on Ubuntu
| 18.04.4 LTS, Linux 5.4.0-65-generic.
|
| Its more stable than it used to be, but the desktop manager
| still keeps hanging every fortnight or so. Changing the
| brightness, right after unlocking my laptop is a recipe for
| getting frustrated, and eventually having to hard restart
| the computer. Other micro issues pop up every now and then.
| pmontra wrote:
| Basically every laptop is unsupported or best effort /
| best luck on Linux (except System 76 and the like.) My
| brightness control keys use to work or not according to
| the kernel and the NVIDIA driver versions. I configured
| two hotkeys to increase and decrease backlightining with
| X11 and forgot about the original ones. However I never
| got a crash because of them. Maybe the screen froze a
| couple of times since Ubuntu 20.04, probably a video card
| crash (lots of windows.)
| geraltofrivia wrote:
| Oh I didn't install (on purpose) the NVIDIA drivers in my
| computer this time around. Last time, the brightness
| control would stop working, and the GPU would run a 100%
| of the time my computer was on. Drained battery in about
| 45 minutes.
| vladvasiliu wrote:
| I agree that Finder is somewhat weird in regard to
| hierarchies, but it all makes sense if you get to know it:
| basically, you can move around with CMD+Arrow. Up goes up a
| directory, down goes down a directory (or opens the file).
| Left / Right go forward / back in history, like a browser.
|
| I'm not sure Windows is such a great example in the
| conversation about file systems, what with its "collections"
| and abstract hierarchy which is sometimes upside down and
| somewhat - but not fully! - circular.
|
| Open an explorer window, click on your name under "quick
| access". You're in the home directory. You also have a
| "Desktop" folder there. Go in there. You see your desktop
| files. So far so good.
|
| Now go back to your user folder and click "up". You're now in
| "desktop". What?! Only now, there's other stuff in there. How
| many desktops are there?!
|
| Now go back to your user folder, choose any folder. Click on
| the address bar. C:\users\your_name\your_folder. Click twice
| "up", you expect to be in C:\users, right? Ha!
|
| Now type C:\users\your_name\your_folder, or browse through
| the C:\ in the left pane. Click the address bar and compare
| with earlier. Now click up. Very intuitive. Depending on how
| you got somewhere, your apparent hierarchy is not the same.
|
| Back to the "quick collection" thing, there's a desktop entry
| there. Click it. Looks like the first desktop folder, so no
| surprise here, right?. Click up. You end up in "my computer"!
|
| Now, do the same operations in Finder. How many different
| desktops are there? Not sure how Windows is more logical or
| user-friendly.
|
| I side with the other poster who said that most "common
| users" just don't understand file systems, and so they put
| everything on the desktop because it doesn't go away.
| alleyshack wrote:
| > basically, you can move around with CMD+Arrow. Up goes up
| a directory, down goes down a directory (or opens the
| file). Left / Right go forward / back in history, like a
| browser.
|
| This is really helpful to know - it's one of my biggest
| bugaboos about using Finder & navigating the Mac GUI.
|
| On the other hand, I suspect this kind of obscure key-based
| shortcut is a big part of why Macs don't feel intuitive to
| a lot of users. How could I have known this shortcut
| exists? It's not broadcast anywhere obvious. My options for
| finding all these obscure shortcuts aren't great. I could
| scroll through a submenu in the Settings pane, hoping to
| find something that looks like it says the thing I'm trying
| to do (and then that I can figure out what keys it means,
| since Apple key symbology is VERY arcane). I could stumble
| across a mention of the shortcut in a forum like this. Or I
| could Google in the hope of finding something - though that
| assumes I believe it's doable in the first place, which I
| didn't in this particular case.
|
| It would also help if Apple chose easier / more intuitive
| keyboard shortcuts. A "shortcut" which both is the only way
| to do something, and also requires pressing a minimum of
| four seemingly-random keys, is not a shortcut at all - it's
| a mental load on the user that they just have to hold in
| their heads forever.
| vladvasiliu wrote:
| Yeah, I remember being frustrated about the
| discoverability when I started using Mac OS.
|
| Shortcuts mostly appear in the menus, but I remember one
| in particular being elusive: cmd + down. I've found it
| out by asking a friend.
|
| I think there is supposed to be a method to the madness,
| though it's maybe less and less clear nowadays,
| especially with applications that don't implement them
| correctly (such as MS Office, electron apps, etc) and
| people being very used to Windows' conventions.
|
| For example, the modifier keys' names are usually an
| indication of what you can achieve with them.
|
| CMD (the "flower-like" key, directly next to the space
| bar) is usually the one used to produce... commands. As
| in Copy, Save, etc.
|
| Then you have your ALTernative / Option, which usually
| modifies some other key's usual behaviour. You can obtain
| dead keys with it. ALT+e / e = e. etc. It also works in
| menus to obtain alternative actions. You can click a
| menu, press alt, and see the entries change.
|
| And CTRL deals with control characters. ctrl-c in the
| terminal, line editing (ctrl-a in any text field goes to
| the beginning of the line, etc). It's not clear to me why
| right click is obtained with control and not alt,
| though...
| Spooky23 wrote:
| By default, windows hides file extensions and pushes Office
| to be OneDrive first.
|
| The problem with these features is that people have varying
| needs and don't understand or respect what they are! Filing
| is a great example, everyone keeps files, but most people
| have no organization. That's why once upon a time companies
| hired people to file things. It's also why Apple tried to
| kill the file metaphor for iOS.
|
| MacOS has the wacky finder UI, but the search is best in
| class and once people discover it, they just go away and do
| their thing.
| rchaud wrote:
| Yes, much as I dislike Finder, I must admit that it's
| search is fantastic, and nearly instantaneous.
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| j-pb wrote:
| The entire thing used to be super intuitive and consistent.
|
| Disk images were the mac equivalent of a compressed folder, e.g.
| zip. And I find the "compressedd virtual usb-stick" idea a lot
| more intuitive than the whole "we cram files into other files and
| loose all metadata" shenanigans.
|
| Apps used to be simple files in the finest unix tradition. No
| weird installer that does who knows what, no wizards, no special
| system files, no uninstaller.
|
| Want to take your app from one computer to another? Just send the
| file.
|
| App stores, installer, and the whole sandboxing gunk, is a
| million times more complex and unintuitive.
|
| The author seems to be oblivious to the simplicity of the old
| ways, and thus suspects some hidden magic going on in loading the
| disk image.
|
| Loading the disk image doesn't do "something" and then displays
| an IKEA esque installer window. The window is literally a finder
| window with hidden borders.
|
| The idea was: "If a user can drag and drop files, they can
| install apps."
|
| The workflow described is composed of several orthogonal concepts
| that each on their own are super intuitive, or at least were,
| when unix philosophy, file system usage and user empowerment were
| still at the core of Mac Os values.
| crazypython wrote:
| Indeed, a .pkg is just a compressed folder and a bash script.
| pantulis wrote:
| Or "uninstalling" apps, always kind of confusing on Windows.
| Not on the Mac.
|
| Still, I think it's not that the Mac is not that intuitive any
| more, it's that Windows has more or less caught up.
| lbriner wrote:
| That depends on your opinion.
|
| Deleting an app folder on MacOS is no less intuitive than
| right-clicking an app in windows and choosing Uninstall.
|
| Certainly in most OSs (I think), there is a good chance that
| more got installed than just a single folder so anyone who
| isn't exclusively on a Mac is going to think that deleting a
| folder is asking for trouble.
| jolux wrote:
| >Deleting an app folder on MacOS is no less intuitive than
| right-clicking an app in windows and choosing Uninstall.
|
| Here's a question though: What are you right-clicking in
| Windows that gives you an uninstall option? Windows is so
| complicated that most of the time it's not even the app
| itself. You certainly won't get an Uninstall option right-
| clicking the executable in Program Files, you have to find
| a magic shortcut somewhere that is keyed up in the registry
| with the relevant uninstaller package.
| hobofan wrote:
| Only on a superficial level. Everything that the app has
| dumped across the system (e.g. in ~/Application Support) is
| still in place, after the default "uninstall" of a Mac app
| that was put in the trash.
| arprocter wrote:
| Plus there are two Library folders, both containing
| Application Support (the one you mentioned, and in
| ~/Users/username/)
|
| It feels strange that doing Command-delete on some apps
| just moves them to Trash, but other times it triggers a
| script that deletes it
| KptMarchewa wrote:
| Uninstalling on windows wasn't only confusing, it was
| straight up broken, since applications were leaving random
| junk everywhere in the filesystem. Bonus points for when that
| junk prevented subsequent install.
| pantulis wrote:
| Or the dreaded DLL hell. I'm not a Windows user any more,
| but I think this does not happen any more.
| baryphonic wrote:
| Uninstalling on macOS is actually pretty tough, since
| ancillary files are not cleaned up. I end up installing a set
| of third party utilities whenever I set up a new Mac that
| help me with a bunch of the weird stuff that isn't handled by
| default. (including AppCleaner and ShiftIt for uninstallation
| and window management, respectively).
|
| Windows makes it pretty easy with the one "add or remove
| programs" section of the control panel.
| jolux wrote:
| >Windows makes it pretty easy with the one "add or remove
| programs" section of the control panel.
|
| Except there's no guarantee that uninstallers will remove
| all ancillary files on Windows either, especially because
| Windows developers seem to have a habit of just spraying
| configuration files and serialized state all across the
| filesystem haphazardly with little concern for
| organization.
| symlinkk wrote:
| There's no guarantee, but on average uninstallers clear
| away a lot more than dragging and dropping an application
| to the trash.
| AshamedCaptain wrote:
| It's not really a Windows-only thing. Even OSes with
| proper packaging systems (and even MSI on Windows) will
| still forget a lot of files e.g. in user's home
| directories. How do you even decide when do you remove
| those?
| AshamedCaptain wrote:
| Which doesn't clear ancillary files, either. The only
| platforms that I know of in widespread use which actually
| clear all ancillary files on uninstall are iOS and Android
| (except for SD card).
| nabla9 wrote:
| It's unfortunate that the intuitive user interface for a new user
| is the goal for commercial reasons.
|
| Many people use computers 2-8 hour per day for their whole life.
| It would be worth of the effort to create secondary consistent UI
| that takes weeks to learn, even if it would increase productivity
| just 5%.
| AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
| I don't see any reason OSs cannot be both more intuitive and
| afford more productivity than they currently do. Unfortunately,
| as far as I can tell neither is a goal of modern Desktop OSs.
| goldcd wrote:
| But I don't think there are people out there happily burning 5%
| productivity to compensate for poor UI.
|
| Normally people are burning productivity by not
| learning/knowing what their existing UI provides.
|
| e.g. In windows windows-key+arrow, lets you snap windows to the
| side of the screen (or minimize, mazimize, shift monitor etc).
| Now I've absolutely no idea when this feature was introduced -
| but plenty of people are still reaching for their pointer
| device to drag stuff about.
|
| It's a nice feature. You don't forget it - but it's bad UX as I
| swear usage of it only spreads by word-of-mouth. No idea if MS
| invented it - or it was 'borrowed' from another OS.
| dahart wrote:
| Are there any thorough UX studies of modern OSX vs Windows, for
| many of the OS UI choices and applications? While I'd agree that
| the OSX install process is quirky, it's just a single example and
| it's not compared to anything. It's easy to complain about single
| examples of unintuitiveness in any OS - they _all_ have them,
| many of them. It would be interesting to see a more complete and
| fair comparison, if such a thing exists.
| enos_feedler wrote:
| Sounds like Chrome just needs to be in the App Store
| anothernewdude wrote:
| Biggest thing that makes a computer intuitive is being the same
| interface I've already used. So of course all three major
| platforms have made breaking changes to their UIs.
| dfxm12 wrote:
| I feel like describing the application installation process is
| being obtuse. The installation process can basically be distilled
| to copying the app to your local desktop. Counting closing
| windows among the steps? How will anyone figure that one out?!
| Even if you can't, it's easy to understand and remember after you
| do it _once_.
|
| Anyway, going back many, many years, I feel like there was a time
| where if you gave a mac or a windows computer to someone who had
| never used a computer before, they'd more easily understand OSX
| (or even going back to system 7) before they understood Windows.
|
| The OSX experience today is pretty much the same as Windows
| though, and most people nowadays "learn computers" from their
| parents' OSX or Android devices, so, new users' intuition is
| nurtured by the time they get behind a mouse and keyboard.
| FabHK wrote:
| I agree, though have to add that it adds stumbling blocks to
| people that don't come with the implicit knowledge (that was a
| matter of course when everything worked with floppy disks). I
| have seen people start the application directly from the disk
| image always, and accumulating mounted disk images that they
| don't unmount/delete.
| klelatti wrote:
| I have a 2020 MacBook Pro (Intel) and a Windows Surface Laptop 3.
| SL3 is objectively faster (i7 vs i5). I'm reasonably familiar
| with both OS's. I'd agree that MacOS is no more intuitive than
| Windows. But I'd use the Mac over Windows every time.
|
| Why? Because the Mac is so much more 'fluid'. I must use Expose
| hundreds of times a day - it's instantaneous on the Mac. On
| Windows there is enough of a delay for me to try to avoid using
| the equivalent feature. There are lots of similar comparisons.
|
| The little pieces of friction may seem small but they really make
| a difference. I feel like I'm driving a sports car with the Mac -
| not so with Windows.
|
| Edit: If you're going to vote me down then please make a
| constructive comment to tell me why I'm wrong or where Windows is
| more 'fluid' than the Mac.
| agustif wrote:
| For the souls that have to suffer through the context switch of
| using both OS X and Windows or Linux at different workstations.
| htps://kinto.sh is a great open source app that let's you have
| the same keyboard commands and such in every OS, really recommend
| it!
| lioeters wrote:
| Link is missing a "t". It redirects to:
|
| https://github.com/rbreaves/kinto
| agustif wrote:
| This is the repo I wanted to redirect to, yes
| drewg123 wrote:
| I just helped a friend who is a lifetime windows user set up her
| new MBP M1. I was reminded how un-intuitive things are and how
| useful UI elements are hidden in the name of "simplicity". A lot
| of it for her is centered around the finder and accessing files
| in general.
|
| The two biggest issues she had was:
|
| 1) finder not easily acting as an image viewer. Eg, she had an SD
| card from her camera, and wanted to quickly scan through the
| photos and decide what to keep and what to throw away. The
| problem was that it took a while to find a view where finder
| showed images ( think it was called "icon view") and once we
| found that, it took a while to expose a hidden ui element that we
| could use to make the images larger.
|
| 2) "open file" dialog boxes don't show your home directory by
| default. She'd have a file in /Users/name/folder and the open
| file dialog would only show Documents, Pictures, etc, and not her
| home directory. I finally helped her make symlinks from folders
| that the file dialog deigned to show her to where she really
| wanted to go. But why is there no "home" view?
| alanbernstein wrote:
| 1) Finder is an excellent image viewer. You want gallery view,
| which is one of the prominent buttons visible by default in the
| OS version I'm using. Maximize the window, and images will be
| nearly full-screen. No hidden UI elements needed. It's crazy to
| me that there is nothing like this (?) by default in Ubuntu. In
| the case that icon view really is what you want, you can adjust
| icon sizes with the slider in the bottom right corner - still
| no hidden UI elements.
|
| 2) Agreed, this is silly. This is likely fixed by one of the
| items in this very long list of power-user tweaks:
| https://github.com/mathiasbynens/dotfiles/blob/master/.macos
| carlob wrote:
| I switched to Linux a while ago because I was annoyed at Apple
| for a number of reasons so I'm not exactly an Apple fanboy.
| However regarding your 1) there is one thing I'm sorely missing
| and that's QuickLook. No matter what finder view you are in, if
| you are in a folder with pictures (or even Word documents) you
| can press the space bar to see an almost full screen preview.
| Arrows for navigation work as they would if the preview is not
| open, so if you have ordered by date modified instead of name
| you will browse the pictures in that order. I have yet to find
| something in Linux that can do that (even just for pictures).
| yesenadam wrote:
| SPACE works for previewing many/most types of files, not just
| images! Video, audio, text, pdf, html etc. Folders too.
| alanbernstein wrote:
| It also works with plugins for many other types, e.g.
| https://github.com/vibrog/quicklook-gpx
| ehecatl42 wrote:
| If you use GNOME there is sushi:
| https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/gnome-sushi-mac-quick-for-ubuntu
| carlob wrote:
| That's cool! Thanks!
| drewg123 wrote:
| Wow, spacebar? I've been using a mac on and off since 2004
| and I never knew that. Talk about hidden, undiscoverable UI
| elements.
| pilsetnieks wrote:
| > it took a while to expose a hidden ui element that we could
| use to make the images larger
|
| Every folder in icon view has a slider at the bottom for
| exactly this purpose.
| FabHK wrote:
| 1) hit space for Quick Look, then scroll through? Or use column
| view.
|
| 2) home folder is listed on the Sidebar by default (its name is
| the user short name, ie its actual name). If that is not there
| for some reason, go to Finder -> Preferences -> Sidebar.
| drewg123 wrote:
| Thanks. Again, I've been using a mac on and off for almost 20
| years and didn't realize there was a way to enable finder to
| view the home folder. I wonder if the option just didn't
| exist back in ~2003 or so..
| jbverschoor wrote:
| You can simply add it. And otherwise, the shortcut is cmd-
| shit-H for Home. It's all listed in the "Go" menu.
| Liquid_Fire wrote:
| > home folder is listed on the Sidebar by default
|
| Definitely not on by default, at least on Big Sur. I had to
| Google how to get to it.
| FabHK wrote:
| Oh, sorry. I must have set it up way back then, and pulled
| it forward with each migration to a new Mac.
| adamsvystun wrote:
| The first issue is confusing to me. I also recently switched to
| Mac and I find Finder to be super intuitive and easy to use.
| Icons view is very easy to find, there is literally only 9
| buttons in Finder, where 4 of them represent different views...
| As regards to making icons larger I agree that finding the
| actual setting is complicated, but I intuitively tried
| cmd+plus(+) and it worked.
|
| btw for looking through photos I find gallery view to be more
| convenient.
| dhosek wrote:
| 1. If you select a file and press space, it opens a preview.
| Not just for images, but for anything that has a registered
| preview (so, for example, install word, press space on a .docx
| file and you can look inside without actually launching word).
| When I have to use Windows, the lack of an equivalent
| functionality distressing.
|
| 2. The home directory usually isn't that useful or interesting
| to navigate to in practice. I rarely want to go there in my own
| usage. In finder, if you drag a folder to the sidebar, it will
| appear in all open dialogs which is handy for frequently used
| folders wherever they might be (I think I had to do this
| manually when I installed Sync on my computers but Dropbox did
| it of its own volition)
| agustif wrote:
| 1) Just use [spacebar] on any view to open up the image in
| spotlight?
|
| The problem with the mac is that much has been done on top of
| older patterns, etc....
|
| If you're a hardcore user though, I'd take Mac over windows or
| linux any day.
| BurningFrog wrote:
| I've used Macs since 1988, and had no idea this hidden
| feature existed!
|
| UI features don't just need to work well, they also need to
| be discoverable, or they might as well not exist. The old
| school Apple was good at that stuff. Recent decades, not so
| much.
|
| PS Thanks for teaching me this trick!
| wp381640 wrote:
| Even as a power user and someone who loves to not RTFM i've
| found with iPhones / iPads / Macs you gotta refresh and
| reads tips / the docs to make the most of it since so much
| UI is hidden now (unless you're a 9 year old!)
| FabHK wrote:
| Quick Look is super useful indeed. Introduced 2007. Plugins
| make it even more useful (eg for json, torrents, etc.)
|
| https://github.com/sindresorhus/quick-look-plugins
| agustif wrote:
| Yes, I hate it's hard to setup .ts as TypeScript files,
| not video files for VLC, lol
| ForHackernews wrote:
| > Just use [spacebar] on any view to open up the image in
| spotlight?
|
| Just press a random key on the keyboard? How exactly is that
| intuitive?
|
| Keyboard shortcuts are the absolute worst for
| discoverability.
| jbverschoor wrote:
| Most of the shortcuts are right there in the menu. For
| quicklook it's cmd-y and a hidden space.
|
| Use the Help menu. Read the menus.
| layoutIfNeeded wrote:
| But they are the best for productivity.
| cronix wrote:
| As long as people can find them, in order to use them.
| severak_cz wrote:
| It's not about to be intuitive. It's about:
|
| - discoverability (you need to discover how to do it)
|
| - consistency (you don't need to discover it again done in other
| way)
|
| - helpful error messages (e.g. "Chrome not found...")
|
| If you have these three things done, even something ancient like
| DOS can be usable.
| toomanybeersies wrote:
| I've been using MacBooks for 8 hours a decade, for over half a
| decade now, and I still can't figure finder out. Why does the
| delete key not delete files? How do I create a new file? I can't
| even figure out how to navigate down a directory.
|
| I suppose it's not an issue with Finder specifically, but the
| fact that macOS defaults to saving your screenshots to Desktop is
| just terrible. At one point I had hundreds of screenshots on my
| "Desktop" before I got around to changing the screenshot folder
| to `~/screenshots`.
|
| I never actually bothered to learn how to use the macOS UI, I
| went straight from being a Windows user to using zsh for anything
| that wasn't typing code (never quite got into using vim or emacs
| as a daily driver). I've become one of _those guys_ who complains
| when an application doesn 't have a CLI. I don't even own a
| mouse.
|
| The only great thing about the macOS UI is Spotlight, and I use
| it solely for launching applications, and for adding numbers
| together.
|
| In fairness, I don't think macOS is any better or worse than
| Windows (or Gnome, KDE, et al). I just think that if you're
| sitting in front of a computer for 8 hours a day, a mouse is a
| waste of time.
| robertoandred wrote:
| Cmd-Delete deletes files. You create a file in an app. Not sure
| what you mean about navigating down a directory.
| w0de0 wrote:
| If you like spotlight and living in zsh, checkout mdfind!
| vinw wrote:
| > 8 hours a decade, for over half a decade now
|
| For a grand total of 4 hours?
| berelig wrote:
| > I've been using MacBooks for 8 hours a decade, for over half
| a decade now
|
| To be fair, 4 hours is not a lot of time to learn a new OS :)
| Yaina wrote:
| So, I won't claim that installing software that is not in the Mac
| App Store is a totally intuitive process. Still...I kinda think
| it's neat.
|
| On Windows you download an installer, it does some magic (usually
| asking for administrator rights. scary) and then somehow the
| program is...somewhere. It's linked on the desktop, you can
| search for it, but it's unclear what happened.
|
| On macOS Programs are essentially treated as files. You download
| them in their (admittedly weird) containers, drag them into your
| Applications folder (which is just convention, you could put them
| anywhere) and then they are there. Want to remove a Program
| again? Move it to the trash!
|
| I love it, I think it's a very neat concept once you've
| understood it. Sadly Apple doesn't seem too keen anymore on
| people understanding it. The invention of the Mac App Store and
| the "Launchpad", followed by the removal of the Application
| folder from the Dock tried to abstract this neat feature away
| from people and naturally they don't understand it anymore.
|
| But this is Apple, actively trying to make their system less
| intuitive for monetary gain and control over the device, and not
| an inherent flaw of macOS.
| alkonaut wrote:
| > On Windows you download an installer, it does some magic
| (usually asking for administrator rights. scary) and then
| somehow the program is...somewhere. It's linked on the desktop,
| you can search for it, but it's unclear what happened.
|
| The downside of the legacy windows install process is that it's
| "scary", prone to accidentally installing malware etc. However,
| the process is straightforward. The intuitive thing (going to
| whatever you downloaded and opening the file i.e. the default
| action of enter or double click) and then answering only yes/ok
| will let you install the program. Exactly where it ends up is
| of course not obvious - but for most software you'll find it
| the "normal" way - you hit the start button and type something.
|
| What baffles me about the MacOS one is that it's opaque. I
| expect the _default action_ for a downloaded piece of software
| is to make me able to use it, as quickly as possible. I get how
| the whole drag dance works (barely) but other than for
| security-through-obscurity reasons I have no idea why it can 't
| be the default action (e.g. if I double click a downloaded
| file, it would ask me if I meant to install the program)!
|
| > drag them into your Applications folder (which is just
| convention, you could put them anywhere)
|
| I think it's close to being great, and it certainly has more
| potential than the windows legacy system (which for obvious
| reasons can't be improved upon much!). But if I'm forced to
| google a few times before installing a downloaded container
| something is not intuitive. Meanwhile my kid can install any
| app, and some malware, on my windows machine. Just by guessing.
| ezzzzz wrote:
| Pure speculation here, but I imagine that Apple is probably
| working on a unified OS between IOS and MacOS. The pieces are
| there between Catalyst and now the new ARM macs. MacOS is pretty
| outdated from a UX perspective, but I reckon there is something
| in the pipeline. This is likely to continue to push the walled-
| garden approach where folks go to the app-store for downloads,
| but even my MIL had the same confusion with not being able to
| find certain software on the Windows store. Hopefully Apple keeps
| things open for power users, giving us the ability to install
| things from outside the app store. I don't think I would ever
| choose Windows as my first choice for doing development even with
| WSL (although Windows has become much more developer friendly
| within the last few years). At the end of the day, I don't care
| to spend much time configuring any machine I use to do work and
| would prefer stability over customization.
| matchbok wrote:
| Still light years ahead of whatever they use on Windows. To each
| their own.
| sidlls wrote:
| I recently switched to a Macbook. Formerly used mostly linux,
| with an occasional boot into Windows for gaming now and then,
| so it's not like I'm comparing to some nirvana experience here
| (linux is laughably bad and unintuitive). I've used a macbook
| for work for over 6 years now, though.
|
| The MacOS desktop is...a poor experience even compared with
| linux. And don't get me started on the Finder app. That has to
| be one of the most infuriatingly bad applications I've ever
| used. It's opinionated in mostly the wrong ways and is
| cumbersome to use to navigate around to actually _find_
| anything.
| jermaustin1 wrote:
| I actually like APT on ubuntu (and probably Debian), but the
| disk-image-based install mechanism of MacOS is just WEIRD.
|
| Windows has installers, which makes since for "installing", but
| I agree there is a lot of inconsistency in windows installers.
| And at least Mac is consistently weird.
| wk_end wrote:
| Well, it used to be consistent, maybe back in the days of
| System 6. Nowadays some apps you install from the App Store,
| some you install by opening a disk image and dragging to
| Applications, some you install by running an installer, some
| you install via Homebrew...
| yawaworht1978 wrote:
| I have worked professionally with both. Let compare some
| features. Sticky notes, windows wins. Simpler, does not change
| background color of pasted text. Keyboard layout, crtl key is
| simply more ergonomically placed on a windows keyboard. Keyboard
| shortcuts for browsers, some of the shortcuts appear to be
| missing on Mac. MS office suite, no comparison. More hardware
| choice. Updates are less of a hassle on Mac, her iOS wins imo.
| Peripherals and price is windows all the way. Search and settings
| appear better to me on windows, this could be subjective. More
| freeware on windows. Desktop management is better on windows.
| Cortana and Siri equally suck. Mac's look better on average, only
| the top of the line windows machines look and feel equal or
| better.
| robertoandred wrote:
| How is ctrl more ergonomic? Command is directly under your
| thumb.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| I've been using Macs since 1986 (Mac Plus). I've been through all
| the various OS iterations.
|
| Each has had pluses and minuses (often -significant pluses and
| minuses).
|
| I write code for Apple devices. Native Swift code, so that means
| that I need to use a native IDE (Xcode or AppCode), on MacOS. If
| they are able to port Xcode to iPadOS (might be awhile), then I
| might consider iPads.
|
| Windows 10 is fine. I'm just not familiar with it. My "muscle
| memory" is MacOS, so it's painful and frustrating for me to
| switch to Windows.
|
| I generally recommend to folks that they stay with whatever
| operating system they have "muscle memory" on. The hardware for
| all of them usually includes high-quality, performative choices
| (naturally, for a significant cost).
|
| Just my $0.02. I'm not a zealot. I don't get a commission from
| Apple if people use their products; especially with this crowd,
| who are just as likely to be CLI jockeys, as GUI users.
| lordnacho wrote:
| Once I got to a certain place in my coding knowledge, I stopped
| caring so much about the different OSes. Once you see the
| abstractions you know what layer to look for. Is the thing a UI
| problem or a network config problem? Normally it's clear once
| you've coded a bit.
|
| I like my MacBook mainly because of the screen, and a little bit
| because of the touchpad. Those are both hardware considerations
| rather than OS.
|
| In terms of using it, I have a terminal on shortcut, which I also
| do on my backup Linux machine. If I had a Windows as my daily
| machine I think I'd do the same. In terms of installed apps, all
| the IDEs are on all platforms, and all chat programs are on all
| platforms. Just about everything else is in a browser. So it
| hardly matters too much what you pick.
| baryphonic wrote:
| I don't really care between macOS or various *nix, but I really
| despise using Windows. The last time I seriously used Windows
| (granted, probably about seven years ago), I was astonished
| that the OS still required (or at least strongly urged) me to
| reboot after I installed anything. Small little shoddy UI
| quirks on Windows kept me frustrated, e.g. not being able to
| find anything in the control panel, or especially that a window
| must have focus for me to scroll (on macOS, scrolling affects
| whatever is under the mouse cursor regardless of focus). They
| were all small but added up to a horribly frustrating user
| experience. When I started seeing ads pop up in my start menu,
| I decided my Windows days were over and I wiped that machine in
| favor of Linux Mint.
| input_sh wrote:
| My favourite unintuitive action comes from Windows 8 (before
| 8.1). Here I was, with an IT education, unable to figure out
| how to shut down the computer!
|
| It wasn't in the start menu like in every other Windows
| version before and after. No, to do that you needed to swipe
| from the right side of the screen for some sort of a system
| sidebar to appear (I believe it was called "charms"). I've
| used the cmd command I was familiar with for months (shutdown
| -s -t 0) before finally deciding to consult with a search
| engine, and oh boy, was I pissed when I found out where it
| was.
|
| Super glad I never have to touch Windows to do my work now.
| city41 wrote:
| I have one Windows machine for a game I play. The number of
| updates it has to install, how long it takes, and the fact it
| has to take place during shutdown is _so_ obnoxious. How do
| people put up with this? I could never use Windows as my
| daily driver due to this alone. Ubuntu quietly updates in the
| background, and only needs to reboot if the kernel got
| updated. I think I reboot my main machine after an update on
| the order of once or twice a year.
| egypturnash wrote:
| The dmg install process has always been a mess.
|
| But note that Little Sister was pretty instinctively going to the
| App Store. If Chrome was in there she would've probably gotten it
| with no problems.
| kokey wrote:
| I also think the reducing friction for the installation of
| downloaded DMGs from somewhere on the internet is not being
| done on purpose. There's so many points that MacOS makes you
| have to think 'do I really have to install this and do I trust
| this?' instead of just double click and tapping 'next' and 'ok'
| until it's installed. I think Google also not really
| participating in adopting the preferred installation flow on
| Apple devices is also done on purpose.
| AshamedCaptain wrote:
| Funny, I remember 20 years ago people being excited about the
| "Drag to Applications" to install and calling it an example of
| extremely good -- as they would call it today -- UX.
| AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
| And that is actually as old as Mac itself, only it used to be
| even more intuitive because the application was a single file
| on an actual disk instead of a disk image. "Installation"
| didn't even really have much meaning, you had applications and
| you had disks and applications were just another thing that
| could be on a disk.
|
| I miss this.
| makecheck wrote:
| Installation is definitely weird. Now that /Applications is
| protected anyway (it is a virtual folder showing content from
| both the built-in system image and the stuff you installed), I
| wonder why they don't just streamline it and make disk images
| auto-install.
|
| Those who did not use Macs before Mac OS X may not realize that
| Mac OS X started out approximating Mac OS 9 behaviors and never
| really completely ported over all its nice behaviors. The Finder
| in particular was a joy to use on Mac OS 9, and is somehow still
| clunky today. Even when they sort of move forward it does not
| seem as well thought out, e.g. pop-up windows worked beautifully
| on Mac OS 8.5 but Stacks seem like a kludge by comparison.
| kazinator wrote:
| Macs were intuitive in the 80s and 90s. Hands down the best thing
| in the consumer computing scene in that regard (not to mention
| non-consumer computing scene, which was a joke in terms of
| usability). Apple basically wrote the book on UX.
|
| Now it's a has-been reputation, based on ancient history attached
| to the brand name, which only brand loyalists blindly believe.
|
| It's like believing that a Toyota is good because of hearing your
| dad reminisce about that good old 4Runner truck or Supra he had
| in 1988.
| jayd16 wrote:
| I feel like Apple just trades discoverability for visual
| simplicity and "power features" aka users just knowing the
| shortcuts or what to click.
|
| I think its a lot less intuitive but others seem to suffocate in
| analysis paralysis when presented with too many options so ymmv.
| rationalData wrote:
| My grandparents got iPhones (during COVID) because they were
| supposed to be easy.
|
| Wow, that's just the marketing.
|
| The jargon was outside their understanding, and unless we were
| physically looking at the phone, we couldn't guess what word in
| the Appstore meant Download.
|
| And it got worse, the requests/requirement to login with Apple ID
| on various occasions were frustrating.
|
| And from a tech geek, I had a work IPhone where I struggled to
| change settings and found annoyances with bugs.
| echelon wrote:
| > I struggled to change settings
|
| Apple's posture is that the defaults are good for most people.
| Their settings management is second class in all of their
| products compared to Windows and (especially) Linux and
| Android.
| pram wrote:
| The implication of there being some kind of cohesive
| "settings management" in Linux is amusing.
| echelon wrote:
| I didn't say cohesive.
|
| I don't have any trouble getting Linux to behave the way I
| want.
| danity wrote:
| Hooray, another Apple-hating circle jerk post!
| dang wrote:
| Please don't do this here.
|
| Everyone with strong feelings on $X (such as a BigCo or any
| other topic really) thinks that the community gets way too much
| anti-$X hate. The people who feel the opposite way think the
| forum is biased in exactly the opposite direction. These biases
| are in the eye of the beholder--they are predictable from your
| own passions. That makes comments like yours here particularly
| unhelpful, because they'll mostly just provoke the other side
| into passion wars, which are predictable and tedious and
| usually turn nasty.
|
| I don't mean to pick on you personally. You're far from the
| only person suffering from this condition--in fact it seems
| universal in some form.
|
| https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
|
| https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
| jermaustin1 wrote:
| Author here... I exclusively use Mac and Apple products (other
| than my Kindle Paper White), thanks for reading.
| piokoch wrote:
| Intuitiveness is a strange topic. Think of moving to the
| beginning and the end on the command line in the terminal. This
| is done using Ctrl-A and Ctrl-E keys. Is this intuitive? Yes, it
| is for someone who was using Emacs for 20 years as it uses same
| keys. Is this intuitive for a typical MS Windows user who uses
| Notepad++ and MS Word? Hell, no.
|
| Same with operation systems. For someone accustomed to Windows
| conventions things like lack of Ctrl-X on Mac for cutting files
| (so after Ctrl-V they are removed from old location) will be
| counter-intuitive. For people living in Mac ecosystem this is
| natural and does not affect their workflow (they are even epic
| discussions on the topic in the Internet).
| cferr wrote:
| I just use the Home and End keys in the terminal, which seems
| intuitive enough to me.
| robinj6 wrote:
| I've used a PC heavily for 15 years and 6 months ago switched
| cold turkey to a Mac. There is only one thing I found Windows to
| handle better and that is file system navigation (via UI). I just
| cannot get used to finder, from the default lack of an address
| bar, to individual windows not showing up on your tab switcher,
| to the lack of an equivalent run dialogue, etc. It just isn't as
| intuitive to me and dealing with the file system is unpleasant.
| jbverschoor wrote:
| cmd-~ for window switching in an app
|
| you can modify some settings and "defaults write" to show full
| paths and extensions.
|
| cmd-shift-g to go to any folder (with tab completion and ~)
|
| cmd-up -> up a folder cmd-down -> open/go in
|
| cmd-shift-h -> home dir cmd-shift-a -> apps dir cmd-shift-u ->
| utils dir
|
| cmd-k -> connect to server
|
| Don't forget the proxy icon drag/drop. It works with file
| dialogs, but since big sur, press shift to show the icon :-(
|
| cmd-1234 to toggle views
| taylodl wrote:
| My main machine is a Mac, but being a developer I also have
| occasion to run Linux and Windows. I like Mac the best, but it
| has its warts. Linux and Windows likewise have their bright
| spots. I like Macs best because its the best platform for me for
| all my hobbies: software development, photography, and making
| music. As always, YMMV. That's why we used to call these thing
| _personal_ computers.
| Shadonototro wrote:
| yes they are, that is why they are popular among non-tech people
| anonleb4 wrote:
| They have a tiny market share worldwide. Apart from the USA not
| many people in the world own them.
| Shadonototro wrote:
| # Worldwide shares:
|
| - Windows: 74%
|
| - macOS: 16%
|
| - chromeOS: 2%
|
| # NA shares:
|
| - Windows: 63%
|
| - macOS: 26%
|
| - chromeOS: 5%
|
| # Europe shares:
|
| - Windows: 76%
|
| - macOS: 16%
|
| - chromeOS: 1%
|
| # Asia shares:
|
| - Windows: 80%
|
| - macOS: 8%
|
| - chromeOS: 0%
|
| --
|
| So if we only take NA + EU
|
| - Windows 69%
|
| - macOS 21%
|
| That's not bad at all
|
| Source: https://gs.statcounter.com/
|
| EDIT:
|
| Asia doesn't make lot of sense, they are more of a smartphone
| oriented market than desktop
|
| Asia:
|
| https://gs.statcounter.com/platform-market-share/desktop-
| mob...
|
| What's interesting, smartphones became the most used type of
| device last year
|
| Worldwide:
|
| https://gs.statcounter.com/platform-market-share/desktop-
| mob...
|
| Today:
|
| Smartphone: 54%
|
| Desktop: 42%
|
| And if we compare Windows vs iOS in NA:
|
| - Windows: 31%
|
| - iOS: 27%
|
| - macOS: 13%
|
| So yeah, it doesn't look good for windows and microsoft
| Retric wrote:
| Exclude business PC's and OSX's market share is surprisingly
| large. Tablets and smartphones have eaten into the ultra
| cheap PC sales in a big way which has been shifting the
| market.
| jonstaab wrote:
| I just went through the same 2012 Air -> 2020 Air process last
| week. I gave in after spending two weeks trying to get Ubuntu
| working on a Dell XPS 13 with bluetooth, my dock, wifi, a retina
| display, USB, etc, etc. I gave up when connecting my bluetooth
| speaker sent my kernel into a loop and sent the computer back to
| Dell.
|
| There are a million dumb things to quibble over with MacOS, but
| at least it's not Ubuntu.
| geraneum wrote:
| If a certain way of doing things which I am very much used to
| does not apply to a different environment, it does not mean the
| subject is not intuitive whether it's macOS, Windows, etc. To me,
| intuitiveness means how easy it is to operate the system
| correctly without prior training. Honestly, for a non-tech savvy,
| macOS and Windows both have many quirks and don't let me start
| with Linux distros (Fedora is my daily driver). We've had a lot
| of good progress so far but we need to do better.
|
| As an example, reading the comments here, one person likes the
| sorting on macOS and another one despises it! Apparently, the
| term "intuitive" has a different meaning to different people. If
| we want to measure it we at least need to be on the same page
| about what it even means?
| abraxas wrote:
| > We've had a lot of good progress so far but we need to do
| better.
|
| Honestly on the desktop since the days of Windows XP I've only
| seen regress. I'd even argue that XP was a regress in terms of
| UI vis-a-vis Windows 95. The only thing that improved is
| hardware handling (IRQ conflicts resolution etc)
| timbit42 wrote:
| Windows 2000 was the peak.
| rapsey wrote:
| What keeps me on macOS is keyboard shortcuts. Typing on windows
| or linux is so much more annoying.
| tomtheelder wrote:
| What shortcuts do you have in macOS and not in Windows/Linux?
| qq4 wrote:
| That's funny, I feel the opposite regarding OS X and Linux.
| Fwiw I have never used macOS, but I imagine it's very similar
| to OS X.
| Steltek wrote:
| GP's point is that things like favorable shortcuts are due to
| your personal background.
|
| For myself, I was forced on to Mac and the shortcuts are
| excruciatingly frustrating to use. It feels like I've
| forgotten how to use a computer sometimes! I prefer non-
| native apps and overlaid keymaps (in VScode, etc) as much as
| possible to escape from them.
| Yaina wrote:
| Yeah, a lot of comments I see here essentially make
| 2021-comparisons to other operating systems.
|
| Being used to things on other systems get conflated with how
| intuitive it is.
| ghaff wrote:
| I've been using MacOS for the past 10 years after mostly using
| Windows for years before that. Now, I definitely can't really
| use Windows 10 easily for the rare times I use it. A lot of it
| is definitely what you use on a day-to-day basis.
| SyzygistSix wrote:
| I started with Ubuntu as a complete newbie - no idea about what
| a hard drive or RAM was - and had no problems. And very few
| since. Using Mint since Daryna, I've had almost no issues.
|
| I even ran across someone using Peppermint who had no idea they
| were even using Linux and had no problem using their computer
| to do the everyday things.
|
| In my experience using Linux, especially the user friendly
| distros like Ubuntu, Mint, Peppermint, has been dead simple.
| jtdev wrote:
| You know what's really unintuitive? Finding an official solution
| to a basic problem in Windows that requires a reg-edit... the
| number of times I encountered this while working daily with
| Windows was astounding. Never have I encountered an equivalent
| scenario on MacOS.
| dmitriid wrote:
| In the past few years Apple has dropped the ball on HIG and
| MacOS.
|
| Here's AppStore mini-review:
| https://grumpy.website/post/0RsaxCu3P
|
| "Get 15 people, put them in 15 different offices with no
| communication between them, set them to work on one feature at a
| time. You will get something very similar to the App Store."
|
| Here's Apple Music review (spoiler: swearing):
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gE8ZikfrpFU
| blackoil wrote:
| For me maximize to full screen and multiple desktops is most
| useless feature of Mac. For me cmd+tab never works even for 1st
| party apps like Terminal if it is maximized. Cmd+tab always shows
| all apps so you can't use multiple Desktops for mental
| separation. and being Mac you can't change default behaviour of
| button to maximize
| jbverschoor wrote:
| I agree about the mental separation. However, there's only 1
| app instance.
|
| tbh, my ideal desktop situation is 2 or 3 computers with
| synergy in between. separation of applications / tabs.
| skeletal88 wrote:
| What infuriates me the most is the behaviour of the end and home
| keys.
|
| In IntelliJ they work like they should. In some other
| applications also - editing some text, home moves to beginning of
| line, end to the end of line.
|
| But noooo. Some Apple designer thought that when you press End
| then you really want to get to the end of the current document,
| whatever that is. For example - writing a bug report/story in the
| browser in the text area, want to correct something or change the
| first word on the line, I press Home to get there, like I would
| do on Linux or Windows, but on Mac it takes me to the beginning
| of the website. Why on earth would anyone ever want that to be
| the default behaviour? Same with the End key. This is just beyond
| stupid. I guess I can get there with cmd-left/right arrow, but
| why not make the most used functionality the default?
| rvalue wrote:
| quoting from the post
|
| >> but I switched to Mac because the hardware is just better than
| even the best Windows hardware for the same price, and the
| software typically JUST WORKS.
|
| author claims Windows to be a superior operating system but "just
| works", isn't that the clearer signal to better software?
| phendrenad2 wrote:
| Apple is always coming up with new "trust us this is better" ways
| to do things, seemingly without thought for how they interact
| with older "trust us this is better" things. TFA has a great
| example. MacOS made the "Applications" directory because Steve
| Jobs thought installing an application should be something you do
| via a "drag". Everything should be a drag! Eject a CD? Drag it?
| Where? Uh, hell, the trash can! Want to copy files? Don't copy-
| paste like a rube, instead drag it! And the App Store is an
| abstraction where the user doesn't need to know that the
| Applications directory exists, oops.
| Popegaf wrote:
| They aren't.
|
| The first time using it about 10 years ago was confusing:
|
| Single button mouse --> no instructions, can't find out how to
| right click
|
| Double click on window --> fullscreen; uh... move mouse around
| edges to find how to get back to other windows
|
| Drag window to side of the screen to split window --> nothing;
| search the application menu --> nothing; Cmd+Right? --> nothing;
| oook, I have to actually resize everything manually
|
| Try to install software from app store:
|
| - you must login --> failed (server was down that day) - search
| "how to install XYZ on mac" --> download .dmg and follow these
| steps
|
| "Natural scrolling" still confuses me everytime I touch one even
| after a whole week it didn't feel "natural". Especially diagonal
| scrolls felt off; does moving your 2 fingers right scroll left or
| right?
|
| I remember trying to help out a friend download music on her
| iphone to play it there. We finally had to download it on the
| mac, import it into itunes and sync the iphone with it. No idea
| if things are better.
|
| More recently, video calling was quite the experience. The
| browser couldn't access the camera, so a popup came up and I had
| to restart the browser. Then I wanted to share my screen, another
| popup came up follow by another restart. Finally, I wanted to
| share audio from a short clip being played, well that isn't in
| mac so some trial version of something had to be downloaded and I
| never actually got it to work.
| philliphaydon wrote:
| > Single button mouse --> no instructions, can't find out how
| to right click
|
| I can't stand OSX, but I'm pretty proficient. I think the right
| click is a symptom of you being so used to Windows or linux.
|
| The average user probably never needs to right click. I bought
| my mum a MacBook Air and she's never needed to right click in
| the 4-5 years of owning it.
|
| I think it's hidden for good reason. She also never asks if she
| should right or left click. Cos the mouse has 1 button.
| timbit42 wrote:
| Having a second button is better than having to double-click.
| http-teapot wrote:
| I think you mean two-finger tap? I only use the trackpad
| and find the two-finger tap far more efficient. I'd never
| buy the Apple mouse, though.
| toomanybeersies wrote:
| I think GP was referring to the Macintosh of old, where the
| mice only had a single button, and right click literally
| didn't exist. You needed to ctrl+click to "right click".
|
| You do make a good point though. From a zero-knowledge
| perspective, using a mouse with left-click for primary
| interactions and right-click for secondary interactions isn't
| the most intuitive concept.
| allie1 wrote:
| It's a commercial linux distro without bugs, and pretty. As a
| dev, I like how most things work exactly as they would on a linux
| host, yet the laptop (hardware) is decent and usability of the OS
| on par.
|
| For non-devs, just the shared folders via icloud, airdrop, photos
| shared/synced - most things that aren't even that advanced bring
| most value imo
| hocuspocus wrote:
| You must not use macOS that much if you think it's close to
| linux or has no bugs.
| scelerat wrote:
| The OP is making a general argument about "intuitiveness" of an
| interface when the difficulty arises because of strategic
| decision by both Apple and Google.
|
| Also, echoes of the '90s OS wars with some similar blind spots:
|
| - no real definition of what is meant by "intuitive" - experience
| with another OS bias one's expectations to the equally arbitrary
| UI decisions the other OS made
|
| Not saying that the install-from-dmg experience the OP describes
| is some ideal installation process, but it certainly is well
| within the established UI paradigms. Disks and disk images are a
| thing. If you want to move a thing from one place to another, you
| drag it there. Apps go in the Application folder, so if you
| download an app from somewhere other than the App store, either
| drag it from the disk image or the downloads folder, to the
| Applications folder. You don't even have to do that; the app will
| still work from wherever you put it.
|
| In essence the OP is making a complaint about a standard UI
| feature which is being used to navigate around the elephant in
| the room, which is that Apple and Google can't agree on a way to
| get Chrome into the App store.
| viktorcode wrote:
| If a heavy Windows user finds themselves more at home there than
| on macOS, it's great! Just use bootcamp, and let's hope we'll
| have one for Apple Silicon soon too.
|
| Just please, please, don't try making macOS into something that
| works anything like Windows. There are people who like it this
| way.
| antipaul wrote:
| The iPad is increasingly the personal computer 2.0 for so many
| people (not all), and it's quite a step up in usability
| brainzap wrote:
| What I like is that the System Settings stayed somewhat the same.
| What still hurts is the Finder, there is just something missing,
| file management is painful.
| yalogin wrote:
| If anything for a first time user Macs are less intuitive. The
| whole window system is very different from everything out there.
| The app does not die when you close the window.
|
| One other thing the author forgot to mention is, in most cases
| one has to eject the DMG manually and then delete it if you want
| to clean up your downloads folder. Else you will just have this
| mounted until the next reboot. I know many people that just just
| the app from the mounted DMG itself without ever using the one in
| applications.
| cytzol wrote:
| > The whole window system is very different from everything out
| there. The app does not die when you close the window.
|
| But that's one of my favourite things about it!
|
| I remember one time when I had to use Windows after being away
| from its window-based paradigm (rather than an application-
| based paradigm) for several years. I had a single window open
| in Sublime Text, and I wanted to close that window then open a
| new one. So I closed that window, then instinctively reached
| for the menu bar to select 'Open Project'. Of course, the menu
| bar was no longer there, because it was part of the window I
| just closed. And then when I opened Sublime Text to get the
| menu bar back, it re-opened its last open document, which was
| the window I was trying to get rid of.
| alkonaut wrote:
| Keeping the application running when the last main form is
| closed is a Mac-ism enabled only by global application menu.
| It has benefits and drawbacks, but it's pretty clear that
| without it there is no intuitive way to do that.
|
| I can assure you that I repeat the fumbling you describe but
| the other way around on mac. It's just two different UXes and
| which operations they allow (or can be intuitively done) will
| differ because of some fundamental earlier choices such as
| e.g. how many mouse buttons the user can be expected to have,
| or whether a program can show a global menu.
| robertoandred wrote:
| > The app does not die when you close the window.
|
| Thank goodness for that. The way Windows conflates apps and
| windows is just a mess.
| thayne wrote:
| As someone who has used Linux for over a decade, I find macs
| rather counterintuitive. Especially if I need to do anything off
| the beaten path. Maybe it's because I'm not a visual thinker.
| Tabular-Iceberg wrote:
| I'm a lifelong Mac user who always thought of it as intuitive, so
| I suggested a relative get one, thinking I would get fewer
| support calls, and when I do actually know the answer. And of
| course not have to deal with bloatware.
|
| I couldn't have been more wrong. That superior trackpad with
| foolproof palm rejection? Useless. She was inadvertently
| triggering weird gestures all the time. But it behaved normally
| when I tried it. Years back I was using a Thinkpad and I was the
| one with the problem, I had to unplug the trackpad to be able to
| type. Neither of us are idiots or spastics, so maybe it's just
| about being unconsciously trained for one system or the other.
|
| Also the Mac came with preinstalled bloatware.
| FabHK wrote:
| As with any OS, you can adjust the trackpad settings though,
| and eg require a click instead of a tap, for example, and
| disable most of the "advanced" gestures.
| amelius wrote:
| What are those images on the "Command" and "Option" keys supposed
| to express?
| cytzol wrote:
| I mean _obviously_ the Command key is the Swedish Campground
| symbol:
| https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Swedish_Campgrou...
|
| And of course, the Option key's symbol is the diagram that Doc
| draws in _Back to the Future_ when he 's explaining alternate
| timelines.
| crazygringo wrote:
| IMHO installing apps is definitely one of the top _two_ non-
| intuitive things about Macs.
|
| Not to mention it's not even consistent -- sometimes you drag to
| Applications, sometimes you double-click a .pkg file, sometimes
| you go to the App Store.
|
| The other thing, of course, being an application open without any
| windows but a menubar present. Start QuickTime and... nothing
| happens except for the menubar changing, which is incredibly easy
| not to notice at all. Even worse, some apps automatically close
| when closing the last window (e.g. System Preferences) while
| others don't (most other apps).
|
| The installation one should be easy to Apple to fix -- when you
| double-click a .dmg, auto-detect if it contains an .app or .pkg,
| and just automagically expand, mount, copy or run, unmount,
| delete expanded file and leave just the original .dmg behind
| (perhaps asking if you want to delete that too). (Also, macOS
| needs a centralized place for _uninstalling_ apps as well,
| particularly .pkg ones.)
|
| The menubar one is trickier. But it doesn't seem unreasonable to
| either expect an application to quit when closing its main window
| (e.g. Activity Monitor should follow System Preferences in this),
| or else for document-centric apps, to open a standardized "start"
| window with options for types of new documents, a list of recent
| documents, etc. when all document windows are closed (e.g. what
| TextEdit and QuickTime could do).
| m463 wrote:
| The .dmg drag thing has benefits - many times you can run an
| app from within the .dmg
|
| You can also drag into locations that are not /Applications
| crazygringo wrote:
| Sure, and that can be reserved for power users. You can
| right-click on applications to open them as folders, and the
| same could be done with DMG's.
|
| 99% of people just want to install or uninstall with a click,
| which is why I wish Finder made that the default workflow.
| m463 wrote:
| The dmg is just one drag.
|
| Meanwhile an installer flow seems to be more of a gauntlet
| you have to get through. For macos it is several mostly
| standardized pages, for windows it is more annoying,
| complete with dark patterns.
| crazygringo wrote:
| Just one drag?
|
| More like unzip, double-click, drag, close, open a Finder
| window if you're on the desktop, find the mounted volume,
| click to eject, close window, select DMG and/or ZIP,
| delete.
|
| I think it's having to locate the mounted volume and
| eject it in order to delete the DMG that is the dumbest
| part. How a regular user is supposed to even figure that
| out is a mystery to me. And, I mean, they don't:
|
| https://discussions.apple.com/thread/7145087
| heresie-dabord wrote:
| In the early period of Apple computers, they offered more
| affordance ("intuitiveness", the user's immediate sense of how to
| use the tooling) than $competingOS.
|
| This is in part because of the simple WIMP [0] affordance, some
| _humane_ design choices such as smiling faces and long filenames,
| and because a few applications were pre-eminent in their
| categories. Adobe Photoshop, for example. What people did with
| Apple computers, they knew how to do and what to expect.
|
| The reputation for ease of use persisted for a long time after it
| became less of a differentiating characteristic. "Reputation" is
| sometimes perpetuated by marketing, not by a consensus of
| thoughtful users.
|
| An OS such a ChromeOS can make a claim to "ease of use" by
| limiting the user's ability to cause damage.
|
| These days and for some time, I use Linux (Debian), Android,
| ChromeOS, and M-Windows in that order of frequency. Linux gives
| me all the tools that I want, Android is mobile, ChromeOS is
| hard-to-break for restricted computing. For M-Windows, the
| typical driver requirements make it necessary.
|
| [0] _ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WIMP_(computing)
| TheMagicHorsey wrote:
| Mac's are not intuitive. But then, neither are Windows machines
| or Ubuntu machines.
|
| I've yet to use an intuitive machine.
|
| The most intuitive thing is the command line ... but you have to
| learn so much before you can use your machine from the command
| line ... its not an investment worth making unless you're a
| developer.
| lbriner wrote:
| > The most intuitive thing is the command line
|
| Are you joking? Searching in a windowed app usally brings up a
| dialog with various search options that can be ticked. Learning
| options for grep/awk/sed etc. is incredible tedious.
|
| Like most things, there is a difference between intuitive for
| person A and person B and this is not the same as whether a
| power user can invest time learning a tool and then become
| super fast at it. An expert in Grep could probably find
| something in a file much more quickly than someone in Windows
| or MacOS but I would argue many people would find windowed apps
| more intuitive.
| Tabular-Iceberg wrote:
| Of course it's intuitive. It's a conversation. It's a weird
| and complicated language, but you talk to the computer and it
| talks back.
|
| Don't confuse intuitive with easy or familiar.
| alkonaut wrote:
| The app install process is a bloody joke. I have installed
| programs my whole life on probably 5 desktop OS:es and I work
| full time since 20 years with desktop software installers.
|
| Yet I had to Google several times to just install a single piece
| of MacOS software.
|
| The windows exe installer system isn't perfect but it beats
| that...
| gumby wrote:
| A big difference is direct manipulation in the Mac interface.
| Windows makes greater use of select and then select verb (e.g.
| cut/copy, move, paste to move a file is canonical). The mac also
| supportes this in many cases (like windows has some direct
| manipulation too of course), so if you come from windows you'll
| use what's familiar to you and not see the difference.
|
| But that approach is not primary in the Mac interface. It's more
| common to drag or manipulate elements directly. So window titles
| and such are actually manipulatable objects, inputs and
| destinations for actions.
|
| I think this misunderstanding a big reason for "I don't get it"
| posts.
|
| Don't get me wrong: there are plenty of problems with the Mac. I
| use it because I feel it sucks less. I just think that a lot of
| articles like this don't manage to get to the real point, for
| understandable reasons.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-05-24 23:02 UTC)